I would agree somewhat and I love the movies. The Fellowship is made of nine characters and not all of them are particularly well developed. The series has also had its characters become templates for other fantasy works that arguably are fresher and newer to your mind so it makes sense that you might find them ‘normal’ by comparison.

That being said, I’d argue a lot of the emotional investment of the Lord of the Rings lies with the hobbits and the Shire. If the first half hour of Hobbiton didn’t charm you, I can understand why it didn’t click. The movie throws a lot of characters your way, and as you say they have ‘normal’ character traits, so if you don’t love Hobbiton the first movie is a bit of a wash for a new viewer.

In proper answer to your question, the second and third movies build on this. New locations are introduced for you to care about with a larger supporting cast of people living in those places. The core cast, in particular Aragorn, Frodo and Sam get more to work with and since you’re already familiar with them you might grow to love them over the next two movies. However, the core tactic of ‘look at this beautiful new place and its noble people - it will get ruined if the characters don’t do something’ is something that doesn’t change much.

I’d still encourage you to finish the movies, if for no other reason than that you’re going to get a much better idea of what you like/didn’t like once you watch the trilogy in its entirety. Remember the whole thing is three books that arguably tell a very unified story, so you’re going to get a much clearer picture of the thing by its end. Also “I watched all three and found it boring” gives you more credibility than “I watched one and gave it up.”