It really depends on the context of where MoS is going.
I agree that if Superman remains in the shadows as a "Red-Blue" Blur, this entire conversation would be moot. If Superman is a public figure though, as he is traditionally portrayed, then it would be hard to swallow that no one in Metropolis (especially in a building full of journalists) would recognize him as Superman. Added to that is the fact that everyone in the world is aware that Superman lives among us as a human. Zod's message gave that away.
Maybe he will remain in the shadows in the MoS universe. Perhaps that's why we have no Jimmy Olsen existing and taking photos of Superman.
Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer
No, i'm not just talking about comicbook fans. I think general audiences are used to that as his disguise, and honestly don't care that it wouldn't work in real life.
It'd be a bit more of a problem if they really had grounded the film in realism like they kept banging on about, but MOS was grounded in absolute fantasy IMO. There was very little of the real world in there for me.
Anything they try and include to justify the disguise is just going to get picked apart. People are going to rip into and discredit anything they say about why it would realistically work.
So why not just be open about the fact it doesn't, acknowledge that it's NOT the real world, and just let audiences enjoy the silliness of it.
I'm pretty sure the intent was to ground the film in real-world logic, despite there being super-powered aliens present. Goyer's approach was 'what if this happened in the real world' according to that interview.
The execution of that idea, however, was somewhat sloppy so I understand why some see the film as 'absolute fantasy' and 'silliness.' I still think they have to respect the intelligence of the audience a bit more with this idea and at least give them a baseline explanation as to how the identity will work within the context of the MoS world.