Yes, most people would think it is a trick and would be skeptical of this supposed heros' true motivations. Why would a hero try to trick us? The other thing you mentioned Angeloz is really one of the problems I had with SR. The mythos of Superman in current film continuity is he being a "god-like" figure with a myriad of religious undertones pointing to this fact. Yet a typical human reaction was never portrayed by the general public in the movie. I was under the impression that they would not have given Lois a pulitzer if her article didn't resonate with the readers. Yet, rather than showing resentment against Superman (whom abandoned them...nobody wants to be abandoned by their savior) they welcome him back with thunderous applause. I thought it would have been much more enjoyable to see Superman struggling to regain their trust. That to me is a lot more interesting than the aggregate seven minutes that was alloted to Jason's allergies.
I think they missed him. They liked him before and when he came back and saved the day they were happy. I think they were meant to be like us. That said I was with them in that I felt happy that he came back. Frankly if they were suspicious I'd think they'd be ungrateful bastards that didn't deserve him. By the way just because most people liked he was back doesn't mean everybody thought so. As for Lois she had a personal connection to him so I accept her right to be unhappy. But everyone else, just about, is a stranger and shouldn't feel as connected to him. As for the article it was written and judged before he came back. Things change and so do peoples feelings.
Who know. But I would love to hear his reaction on this. We never heard him saying anything about it since SR was in theater, so I hope he will at least mention it. I really want to hear his take on fans's criticism.
Like Burton (even Shumacher) and his commentaries? I don't think it changed peoples views though I found them interesting (haven't seen "Batman & Robin" yet).
Angeloz