I posted a bit of a review of it in my journal if you care to read the long version.What didn't you like about it? I thought it was pretty good except for a couple issues at the start.
Man of Steel != superman. It is a pretty good action movie with lots of cinematic moments, but that is not the traditional Superman character. Good when I forgot it was supposed to be Superman, bad when I remembered.
The short version is that Superman has a 75 year history. Except for one brief period during WW2, the Superman of the comics was concerned about saving everything; property and lives. Collateral damage was unacceptable. In the Multiverse there was a theme of an 'evil Superman', but the distinction was clear that it was not the real Superman. There were a few animated series that broke the tradition of Superman being the penultimate good guy, but they were mostly shunned. Ellesworth gave the character an extremely solid moral core, and the franchise adopted it.
Nearly all of Superman's 75 year history is that he has an extremely moral childhood with his foster parents instilling strict Christian values and a protestant ethic. Superman follows the values and protects people and property to the best of his ability, even risking his life to protect known criminals from harm.
The movie was typical of an action show (needless explosions, needless violence that destroys a city, etc.) Some reviewers tallied up Superman's own choices bring between 10,000 to 100,000 avoidable human deaths, along with untold billions of dollars in avoidable collateral damage.
That is okay for a superhero movie. But Superman has 75 years of history. Invoking the brand means you get ALL the brand even if you don't like parts of it. The movie was so-so if it had been a different or generic superhero, but was very off brand for Superman.