Peter Jackson's films and the animated ones are both very different interpretations. Some homages seeing as Jackson was somewhat influenced by the Bakshi movie, but the Jackson ones are much better paced and developed, are different in terms of characterization, and aren't bogged down by awful visuals.
The Harry Potter movies had varying degrees of faithfulness and were close to the books plotwise, but they're still separate entities from the books and, while the first two are somewhat tied down to the books and the fourth was a fairly bad adaptation, have entertainment value of their own. This a given with most book-to-movie translations, since there's a pretty huge difference between telling a story through prose and telling one through acting, cinematography, set design, and special effects. TV and movies are more similar in the basic tools used to tell a story; the main difference between the mediums is a matter of how a story can be paced. 1.0 simply didn't have what it takes for a successful conversion from a TV show to a movie.
The problem is that with 1.0 is that at least 85% of it IS a clipshow of NGE, and it's not as if the remainder was outstandingly brilliant. Who knows? Maybe I'll love 2.0. It certainly sounRAB a lot more interesting than 1.0.