Here's the issue. Superman has always been a romanticised character, he's the best possible version of who we are as a species, despite not being one of us and like it or not that's what people like about the character. When you bring him down to this world's level what you're doing is stripping that character of everything that people look up to and aspire to be. Like it or not, that 'S' symbol means a hell of a lot to people in real life and that counts for something when you're telling a story about the character.
The counter argument of course is why should Superman not be allowed to evolve, why should we not challenge who Superman is, and the answer is simply because that's not what people want to see. Making a film about Superman, Batman, spider-Man, whoever it is, comes with certain limitations creatively. It's not fair but that's just the rules you have to play with when you're dealing with these characters. In all honesty, if you want some type of deconstruction of a superhero you're best off leaving Superman alone and finding a character who fits.
In all honesty both MoS and BvS bring up very valid questions about Superman, questions like do we need a Superman, but not once are these answered positively, and that's a huge problem for a character for many people like. If you ask the question 'Does the world need Superman?' you answer that within your story with an emphatic 'Yes'. What is there to grab onto if the answer is, at best, 'maybe'?
These characters, like it or not, are symbols of inspiration. It's easy to make a story that tears down those characters values, it's much harder to write a story that sticks to those values. Anyone who says you can't make a movie in 2016 with a positive perspective of Superman has either a very pessimistic view of the world or is not trying hard enough. There's plenty there to craft a story that is optimistic whilst also asking questions about who the character is, you've just got to embrace the symbol not reject it.
t:
