I have always thought, personally, that Superman was set up for failure from the very beginning. Here you have a guy whose supposed to be morally perfect and indestructible in every way. The problem with creating a character like that is trying to develop his personality so he's not boring, giving him challenging obstacles to overcome that aren't ludicrous, but especially making sure he doesn't break his moral code. Because when Superman stoops to break his own moral code the people notice. Man of Steel has been catching flak in its triumphant entry as a film for depicting Superman as the guy who often struggles with knowing the difference between right and wrong. In other words, making him seem more human and therefore a more compelling character. But I digress: I believe the film, while being a little over long, was ultimately a success for showing us a young Clark becoming familiar with his power and trying to decide how to use it for the greater good of humanity. However, some of new Clark's decisions have been classified as "that was not very Superman" and have a few die hard fans a little dismayed by the change of character. It's a fine line to try to walk. The problem with Superman is that he is supposed to be perfect in every way and sometimes, well, that just doesn't make for an interesting story. Sometimes you want to see the guy who screws up, but makes it right in the end. Sometimes you want to see the guy who is not so perfect, not so super, and occasionally acts like an idiot because it's just more fun that way.