I think LOTR reads better if you approach it as an epic history of language, to be honest. The linguistics and etymological diversions are more interesting, and frankly better thought out, than the adventure - which is hardly surprising, given Tolkien’s profession.
Not that I think the adventure side is bad, per se, but it hasn’t dated well (ironic, given that it’s a fantasy). One of the reasons I enjoyed the films so much is that they made a much more compelling adventure out of the source material, and pretty much discarded the linguistics side.
LOTR is in the same boat as NEUROMANCER, for me - taken in context of its time, it’s a stunning and singular achievement, a book that almost single-handedly created (and certainly popularised) a genre. But out of context, it suffers because so many of its then-innovations are now commonplace, even clichéd.