Luther had no love of James, but he did not call it evil.
As for Hebrews, he said that it was not written by Paul. In other words he tended to agree with the scholars of his time. Because of that, his commentary on Hebrews hints that Luther was very cautious in saying to much about it.
I will be honest in that I don't know much about 2 and 3rd John, other than he tended to view their authorship the same way many of his period did. I will look into it if I get a chance.
Revelation is an interesting on for you to bring up. Most churches (and that includes the Catholic and Orthodox) don't do much with Revelation. It isn't in the lexinairy that much, and you don't see much commentary on it. Luther also didn't write much on it, because he viewed it as a book that many will take flights of fancy with and run all sorts of directions that make no sense (Left Behind).
A very similar view that many Catholic scholars took of the Apocalypse of St. John.
Don’t whitewash Martin Luther. He hated the seven books he removed from the New Testament as un-Christian forgeries which led souls to Satan.
Not sure where you get the notion that Catholics don’t read Revelation much. They don’t read it like futurism, but they do read it as explaining the mass and the persecution of the Church.