This seems like a classic case of missing the whole point of the work you claim to admire so much.
I mean, I do get fanboyism. When I like a novel, I want the screen adaptation to be faithful to it. I want the screen and sound to immerse me in that universe. I expect differences, but a good adaptation has to be true to the spirit of the original. This is why I despise the Tom Cruise version of The War of the Worlds but love the American version of Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency : both are massively different from the source material, but one is faithful to it and the other isn't.
It's also why I do not for the life of me get Tolkien purists who bang on about elves at Helm's Deep. So bloody what ? You want them to put Tom Bombadil in there ?
Personally I'm enjoying the way the young Elrond and Galadriel are portrayed as wise but comparatively inexperienced. I don't understand why anyone objects to Galadriel being a warrior : she's frickin' immortal, she's gonna have done different things in her past. Nor do I get the apparent discrepancy between young Elrond and later Elrond that this answer objects to. That progression makes sense to me. I imagine young Elrond grows up and has some unpleasant battlefield experience that turns him into the tough, magisterial lord we see by the time of the Third Age, not starting out straight away as that.
Mentioning the races here is a bit of a flag. I do get why you'd be initially surprised. To be honest, I've done this myself elsewhere. But if you can't get over this, that's you're problem. When you insist that the characters must be of a certain skin colour - unless that is absolutely integral to the story, such as when it revolves around slavery - you really ought to go and ask yourself if you've not been reading the whole thing wrong. Skin colour is not a prominent feature in Tolkien's work. You can say some races as supposed to be more "Asian", but that's your reading, not mine.
Then, the claims that they portray the men as incompetent. At this point the flag-waving is practically semaphore, because this simply isn't true. Which males are seen as incompetent ? None that I can think of, nor can I see the women as being shown as disproportionately wise. If anything, Galadriel seems a bit on less astute side.
The appearance of Valinor : it's essentially heaven, so I see no reason its appearance can't be changed depending on who's approaching.
Galadriel's husband : barely gets a mention in The Silmarillion, so I've no idea why this is a problem.
The timeline : yeah, okay, I will say I sympathise with wanting events in the correct order. That's a legitimate objection. But does mucking around with the timeline actually change anything about the spirit of the book ? Not so far as I can tell. There are elves and men and dwarves fighting the return of an ancient evil, so who cares if said evil was supposed to have arisen in what year of what fictitious region ? If Isildur was born after the Ring was forged, what difference does that make so long as it's still him who ultimately cuts it from Sauron's hand ? Sure, you can be surprised by the changes, but what exactly about the changes is it that you don't like ? What difference does this make to the message of the story ?
People be strange.
