You spend too much time worrying about Superman the idea/icon/ monolith and not enough time remembering that there's a guy doing all of this, you end up with a pretty hollow character. That's the one constant thing I've heard about this movie: "Superman feels sorta hollow".
That's so strange to me because I feel like they purposefully set themselves up for one of the most genuinely empathetic takes on the character in the last decade. I mean he's this dude from Kansas who had to expose himself to the world, fight the last of his people, kill a man, and then pick up the pieces of his and everyone else's life after that day. But they kept mode shifting. I mean lord knows they didn't do much character work in the first movie, but that felt more deliberate to accentuate the speed of the events (not done too well but still made sense why to me). This is all, presumably, build up for a character driven follow up.
And from what I hear that's what BvS is surprisingly (for the most part) but Clark's character remains basically as thin and "iconic" as before. It's a shame because there's some really REALLY great ideas in there. The "Superman was just the dream of a farmer from Kansas" line (from the trailers mind you) gets me every time. There's a real guy under all the iconography and expectations, and it's a damn shame they were to scared to really dig in. I mean who the hell cares if it makes him seem weaker, green, or less adept in comparison to Batman or Wonder Woman. They didn't create All Star Superman or even the 80's reboot Superman when they made him, so they shouldn't write him like they did.