I think I will honestly always disagree with that, my wife and I even debate this a little bit ha - I think it's a big assumption that targeting a niche demographic won't also attract the largest possible audience. Trying to bring in the biggest possible audience seems to always hurt good quality story telling - there is a reason the LOTR trilogy is popular - Peter Jackson was a massive lover of the books and it was his pet project targeted towards the people that loved the books just like it and guess what, it made a TON of money but there is also a reason why The Hobbit movies aren't are popular, well loved, or as good of story telling and also barely broke even when compared to production costs.
That being said, even I know that enjoys Star Wars but isn't a Boba Fett fan is enjoying the show - over on the Mandalorian Mercs website - it's getting quite lavish praises to the point where most find literally no fault in the show. That being said, I just can't help but think how all these other people have so far been hoodwinked lol. I do hope that Temura becomes and acts more like Boba as the show progresses. The second episode definitely had some great true Boba Fett moments but they are too few and far between for now.
Risking further derailment, but I will argue the LOTR point. I was one of those who read the trilogy almost every year from 12 to 24 I think? Whatever I was when Fellowship came out. And Jackson's (along with Walsh and Boyens) love for the books is massively apparent, but I honestly don't see how those movies didn't cater to mass audiences over book lovers. Just go on a Tolkien forum and mention Tom Bombadill. I would actually bet they're still lamenting the changes made from the books and probably even wishing the film makers had consulted purists like themselves.
What they did, clearly with monumental success, was interpret the books for a mainstream audience. The lore and intense immersion is a big selling point, but as Jackson stated the book, as written, is unfilmable. They still had to make movies with character arcs that, in some cases, were wholly fabricated. A lot of it is in line with the versions in the books but Faramir is pretty different and Arwen, I mean... If you know the books at all... Also some of the twists and turns with Sam, obviously the scouring of the Shire, etc etc. Motivations were altered, structure changed, characters merged or omitted, dialogue taken from one and given to another and so on. Again, I'm sure there is a Tolkien forum with purists condemning the films for these and other reasons.
That said, I love the movies. To me they're the only perfect trilogy and some days they're a wonderful comfort watch. I love the BTS stuff too (in a different way but almost as much as the movies themselves) and it's what got me to buy multiple editions as well. I couldn't tell you what was added to the theatrical versions because I haven't seen them in almost twenty years. I appreciate what was changed and added and get the motivation behind those decisions. They found a wonderful balance between staying true to the spirit of the book and showcasing what broad audiences can love about the world they were set in.
The Hobbit, I think the biggest reason is the studio forcing it to be three movies rather than two. Rushing through designs and hastily done digital effects didn't help either, but the artificially inflated plot feels, to me, the root of all its issues.
