It’s hardly fair to fault Smith for being the first in a new movement. I’m sure Lutheranism was not all spelled out, nor Wesleyanism all spelled out during the lifetime of the originator. Cavalry Chapels, in my opinion, are nothing more than quasi-charismatic bible churches.
Assuming a new movement is necessary. Some are dangerous, especially when one man set himself as judge and jury as to what the Bible teaches and how it ought to be applied to his subjects. Just ask the followers of Jim Jones.
Oh, sorry, only Calvinists believe in total depravity. Jim Jones wasn’t that bad a guy.
BTW, in case you have not noticed, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bullinger (Heinrich, not E.W.), Ursinus, Knox, Wesley, etc did not wholesale abandon the historic faith of the Church. They largely built on what had gone before. They still saw the Church as having certain essential characteristics, which they made every effort to maintain.
Smith is more in line with the Anabaptist reformer who held the Church largely in disdain, preferring a radically new model. E.g., there is absolutely no way to challenge Smith on any of his beliefs. He is, by definition, always right. Like a super archbishop. Any attempt to do so will usually result in a hardy handshake and map to the nearest exit.