I don't think I ever gave my official review on Spidey 3 anyway:
I give the film an 8.5/10 keeping the following in perspective.
Raimi's original Spiderman was a flawed film. Actually, watching the first two again before seeing Spidey 3, I realized that I really don't like the first Spiderman that much. The dialog is pretty poor overall, and there is so much cheese that it's almost hard to watch. BUT, cheesy awesomeness is what Raimi does best, and Spiderman is still entertaining because of that. But seriously, that film is pretty cheesy for how good it supposedly is.
Spinderman 2, on the other hand, is just outright amazing. It's not only my favorite superhero film of all time, but it's one of my favorite films of any genre...ever. Somehow Sam Raimi crafted a truly brilliant film unlike anything he's ever directed before. It's a serious film-making achievement. The pacing was perfect for the characters, the acting was great (for comic book movie acting), the action scenes were unbeatable, Molina's Doc Ock was just ozzing with personality and remains my favorite silver-screen supervillain to this very day, and the movie was just plain gorgeous to watch. The cinematography was out of this world.
So logically, the fans' expectations for the third film were astronomical. And Raimi desperately wanted to deliver. The only problem was, he couldn't. There was no way he could ever live up to the hype. I doubt Raimi will ever direct a film better than Spiderman 2 anyway, it was just that stellar...his masterpiece.
So really, Spidey 3 was destined to disappoint right from the beginning. I knew this, we all did really. And I sort of hoped I'd be proven wrong. I wasn't. Spiderman 3 is the most ambitious film Raimi, or Sony Pictures has ever made. Too ambitious in fact, that it begins to cave in on itself about half way through. The script simply couldn't bare the weight of the film's visual ambitions.
So, what am I getting at here? Basically, I'm saying that Spiderman 3 is a damn amazing accomplishment nonetheless. It might be the most expensive film ever made, and it shows. The CGI in this film is some of the very best I've ever seen, and Sandman alone is the single finest work of computer imagery I've ever been treated to. The action scenes are just as awe-inspiring as those in Spidey 2, but the context just isn't strong enough to make them as poignant.
And this is where the criticisms come. And this is where I bring Spiderman 1 back into this. Spiderman 3, to me, feels like the true sequel to the first film. I mean, the script obviously follows the event in the second film, but stylistically, this is the followup to Raimi's first Spidey picture. The camp has returned. So has the cheese. I love to hate it. It's here even stronger than in the first flick, and it's also much funnier. Campbell's seen in the restaurant is possibly my favorite in the whole film. And Peter's black suited "emo" romp through New York and the musical number in the jazz club as mindblowingly goofy to watch. They're so out of place, that I can't help but adore them. THIS is the Sam Raimi I know and love. If this movie had been helmed by any other director I might be forced to admit the cheese was part of the movie's failings, instead of its stylistic achievment.
If you watch this film as a direct sequel to Spiderman 2 (which, well, duh Lance, it is you fool) these points of the film can be nearly painful to watch. But people seem to forget how campy the original flick was. To me, Spiderman 3 feel like Spiderman 1 if the gags were even more extreme, the dialog was even more melodramatic (can be a good thing sometimes), and the actions scenes were out-of-this-world-amazing.
If that's not a compliment to this film's greatness, I don't know what is. So yes, Spiderman 3 WAS a disappointment. But any big budget film Raimi does from this point on will be after the out-of-character masterwork that was Spiderman 2. Just roll with it folks. Sit back and enjoy. If you love the Evil Dead series, and you love Spiderman, I don't see how you can't love Raimi's Spiderman 3.