As someone who spends most of his professional life dealing with European matters, I have to say that the EU is neithyer good nor bad ... it has aspects of both, as with any other similar organization.
On the one hand, the EU has dramatically impacted the way Europeans view each other, has made the likelihood of another war in central and western Europe remote, has encouraged much cross-border movement of people for jobs, study, holidays and the like ... it has begun to knit Europe closer together. There are very few Europeans outside of a very small internationalist elite who really consider themselves "European" as an identity, but even for the masses who still primarily identify with their national identity, other Europeans are less strange, less distant and more workable than would have been the case without the EU. All of this is a very good thing for Europe and Europeans.
On the downside, the EU is not a very democratic institution, it is an international bureaucracy headed by representatives selected by the member state governments, but not directly by the citizens of the EU. The European Parliament, which is directly elected, has only an advisory role and no real power. This is becoming increasingly problematic because the EU is constantly expanding its role ... moving from its origins as a customs union to a much broader dossier covering many aspects of daily life in the member states. There is definitely an encroachment on national power, and it is happening at the expense of the democractically elected governments and in favor of an undemocratically selected one ... and that is a negative.
In terms of forcing Franco-German ideas on everyone else, lol, yes this is an issue but the Europeans are onto it. Witness the revolt of all of the small European countries against Germany and France in terms of the stance on the Iraq war. The New York Times makes it sound like all of Europe was against the US, but in reality it was Germany, France and Italy ... the small countries like Holland, Denmark, Poland (soon an EU member) followed American leadership over and against towing the Franco-German line, which infuriated Berlin and Paris and led to President Chirac's condescending comments about the Polish government (words which certainly earned France no friends in the eastern part of central europe hehehe). My own sense of how this is happening is that the larger the EU grows, particularly in Eastern and Southeastern Europe, the weaker the Franco-German hegemony becomes of neccessity. The Franco-Germans know this, and this is why they have proposed that the EU constitution be amended to remove the need for unanimity ... but this makes matters even worse than they are because then we would have an undemocratic EU that could act for all member states without their agreement!! As a practical matter, I don't see the other member states agreeing to this.
Yes there is a cultural smushing going on, but that seems natural. The EU will not get far trying to change things in Greece. What the EU really needs is more Orthodox countries to become members, but that won't happen quickly (the nearest candidates now are really Romania and Bulgaria and they are probably a ways off given the economies there). Yes, there is a general misunderstanding among secular Western Europeans regarding the Greeks and the rest of the Orthodox part of Europe. But I think that as the EU grows, perhaps this understanding will grow over time ... who knows.
As a practical matter, I don't see the EU really evolving into a superstate. The national identities in Europe are too strong, and they are reinforced by language and cultural differences that really serve to prevent the emergence of any kind of federal state that resembles the federal government in the USA, for example.