The only difference here is the conjugation of ある in the past negative, polite vs. casual.
The casual conjugation of ある in past negative is なかった. In polite conjugation it’s ありませんでした. The casual one has です tacked onto the end to make it polite as well.
The first sentence is polite, as you might know. ありませんでした is the negative form of ありました、which again is a formal version of ある. The negative form of ある, ない, ends in い, and is conjugated just like an adjective. That’s how we end up with なかった.
面白く is an adverb that affects the verb it follows, so it’s actually ありませんでした that gets modified, not the other way around.
In that case, I guess I’m confused as to when each of my sentences would be appropriate to use. In English, since the event already happened, I think I would always use the past tense.
The ball the neighbor threw is big.
The ball the neighbor threw was big.
I don’t see why it has to always be past. If the ball still exists, it’s fine to use present. The past has a feeling of telling someone about it while you are not anywhere near the ball anymore.
I’m probably overthinking it, but my intuition was that the Japanese would be more likely to use the present tense even if the ball is not nearby, because the ball is still big whether you can still see it or not.
Since you mention it, I guess I could imagine using the present tense in English exclaiming about the size if you were actually looking at the ball.
I was referring just to the English, but yeah, it would be wise to try to read as many examples as you can of Japanese tenses in real use, because there are plenty of counter-intuitive situations.