I am quite harsh usually, but this isn't bad

Rating: 7/10 (25 May 2006)

I saw this film tonight and went in with low expectations after reading some negative reviews. I actually thought it was marginally better than the first two, and there were even a couple of instances where something surprised me and the predictable, clichéd course was NOT followed. (Though plenty of predictable things happened too, of course).
Having said all that, this is a comic book film and so don't expect every detail to make perfect sense (though there weren't any moments or aspects that particularly bothered me, as I often find in these type of films - certainly nothing as silly or laughable as occurred in Spiderman 2, not that that film wasn't enjoyable in its own way).
The effects are great, the characters remain true to the first installments in the series, and I honestly cannot see why some people have said it suffers by comparison. Sure, there were a lot of characters to deal with, but the same is true of the other films. Perhaps the only thing I think the original director did better was in his comedic touch. There are only one or two genuinely amusing moments in this film and the rest are just typical average action film one liners.
Basically, if you want to see the trilogy story arc conclude (though the possibility of a further film is, naturally, left open) in a relatively sensible, satisfying and entertaining way, it's well worth it.
Overall, I give it a 7.9. To put this in perspective, I gave Spiderman 2 a 7.7, The Hulk a 3.0, Star Wars Episode 3 a 5.8, Batman Begins a 7.9 and Sin City an 8.5.
PS Be sure to sit through the credits until the very end!