The movies are coming from such completely different places that it's silly to compare. I don't think the HP movies were ever made with the intentions of engaging in superb film making. They were made to capitalize on a currently huge and popular franchise. Of course there's a certain level of of skill and craftsmanship involved with the HP movies, but the LotR movies involved a HUGE risk and a risk taken for no other reason than to create amazing films about books that the director and screenwriters were passionate about. Virtually every major studio turned down the project when it was first pitched. A 3 part fantasy series? Pfft. Harry Potter was always guaranteed to make money regardless of whether it was great or not.

But Peter Jackson and company kept pursuing the LotR project, even though people were telling them they were insane because they wanted to redefine fantasy in films. Their goal wasn't to just cash in on a franchise, it was to create wonderful films. And they really had to push themselves, and push the films to be amazing. To prove to people how fantasy films can go beyond what had previously been seen of fantasy films.

The end results reflect the original intentions. One became a popcorn summer flick, and the other became the first fantasy film to ever be recognized and loved by both prestigious film organizations and the general populace alike.

As for the books. I love Harry Potter. I love Lord of the Rings. But Harry Potter will always be an easy breezy sort of read. Fun, entertaining, light. Lord of the Rings on the other hand sends shivers down my spine, it's so stunningly beautiful. Tolkien was a master linguist and it shows in his work. The way he composes his words, structures his sentences, it's incredibly poetic. It's majestic and grand and oozes with depth, back story, and history.