Uh... I'm holding a trashcan lid over my head, because I'm going to disagree here.
I thought Chris Columbus did a great job of the film. I thought it was extremely well adapted. Sorcerer's Stone is more childlike than the later books (they become more dark and more adult as Harry gets older). And making it more adult would have lost us the glorious sense of wonder when we first see magic, brooms, Platform 9-3/4, the Hogwarts Express, Diagon Alley, and Hogwarts lovely Hogwarts.
Now that we've been able to marvel like children at all of it, I expect it to change, just as the books do.
As for which film was the better film, I think they are about equal. HP was much more true to the original material. Trust me, I've read LotR pretty much once a year, every year since about 1969. However, they did fantastic things in LotR. I don't have a preference. They are very different films and equally good, in my eyes. In fact, I'm going to see both of them again this weekend.
Funny coincidence... total babble here... in both movies there is a character I dislike in the books (Snape and Boromir) and ended up liking in the movies. Weird.