Spoilers follow.
Eh, I thought the dwarves were all right. Though it seemed strange that I didn't learn who practically any of them were called, even after almost three hours, and I've read all the books! You'd think that PJ would have included more character bits to differentiate the dwarves.
I did not like much of the Azog bits, mostly because it felt like extra padding, but it also made most of the movie seem like one long chase scene, so there was never a break in the tension, even at Rivendell. It ended up being tiring. Also, it annoyed me that Weathertop was pointlessly shoehorned into this movie, as if we didn't see enough familiar scenery. If I was to do a fanedit, I'd take out all scenes of Azog except for the final one, only because you couldn't really excise that without damaging the story. That way, we would hear about the Azog vs. Thorin relationship, and later it would be a surprise even to LOTR fans that he had survived.
Also a problem with Azog: Having a creepy robot hand. Oh, we're done with that.
I liked the character of Radagast, despite being a bit too cutesy, but there was little reason to have him in the movie. Same with Sauruman, and Galadriel (apparently she can teleport?!) and the stone throwing giants. In fact, any time that the story wasn't solely about Bilbo, they should have cut it. There is something that has been called the Off-Screen-Movie, which is all of the implied events that happen while the actual scenes of the movie are playing, and these implied scenes can make a movie seem more dense, more fast paced, or more dramatic. In the Hobbit, everything about the story is shown onscreen, and this to me makes it seem like there is less story, ironically.
Here's an example. We see three characters that we have just met (Saruman, Elrond, and Galadriel) discuss with Gandalf at length about some place we haven't been (Dol-Guldur) and a character we know almost nothing about (the necromancer). Through this dialogue, we get no impression about what effect it will have on Bilbo, the dwarves, or their quest to go to Erebor. In their discussion, a sword from a ghost that we haven't met yet is revealed, and used to make a subtle argument about the technical nature of magic in Middle Earth, something that we don't know much about. This scene must be absolutely bizarre for a newcomer, and for someone who has seen the LOTR movies, it is pointless collection of references for the sake of linking the two narratives together.
All of this, and they still don't explain the character and philosophy of the eagles, which have probably caused more casual fan confusion than any other element of the movies.