It's a good point. I think it also points to a shift in the way audiences have started to view movies as well. Not so much a shift really, though, but an even greater difference in the emphasis in regard to storytelling.
I always remember the book Hawks on Hawks where Hawks said the secret to a great movie was "three great scenes and no bad ones." Actually, in the interview, he really said something more like the star of the movie (John Wayne, specifically, in that case) needed three great scenes and no bad ones, but the movie on the whole needed six, but the idea still was generally the same.
In that case, he was talking about westerns and gangster movies, and when you get down to it, they weren't trying to tell a new story. The story forms were pretty much set. The audiences knew what they were going in there for, so telling the story wasn't really what they were selling. They were selling the moments in the story. That's something genre filmmakers (and novelists and television shows) had in front of mind back then and still do now, obviously. Marvel superhero movies obviously follow a formula and deliver a familiar story each time. Even the sequel code was cracked with Spider-Man 2. Marvel still focuses on telling the story, but it is really the same story every time from Iron Man to Guardians to Ant Man to Dr Strange, but what matters are the specific details in the movies that set them apart.
With movies like MAN OF STEEL and THE TRANSFORMERS series, the basic framework of the superhero story is still there, but the filmmakers don't really seem to care if the actual scenes on screen really support that framework. Honestly, that's probably a valid approach.
You can sort of see it in the debates fans who love the films have with fans who hate them. Both groups have probably seen as many movies, comics, television shows of this kind as they've spent dreaming. We're talking probably at least a third of our lives or more has been enjoying some form of fiction. Increasingly so as it becomes more available.
We know the story. The debate usually is an argument over how important that story is in the movie compared to the spectacle and scenes in the moments of the movie.
What we don't know are the details of each particular story. This has been a part of cinema forever. The cheap stupid matinee movies from Cat Women on the Moon to IT! The Thing from Outer Space still entertained audiences primary because they delivered the moments and didn't really dwell on the story. The story wasn't what they were selling and even in good movies of the genre, they need to deliver the thrills more than any dramatic insights.
The only real problem I have with the Snyder-verse version of the heroes is that they promised to deliver a "real world" interpretation of the DC heroes following through on Nolan's Batman approach. They don't really do that.
At the same time, if you compare the DC movies to the real world. Men think they are geniuses because they are rich and can come up with the most complicated and expensive ways to fail imaginable. Men think they are heroes because they are strong and violent. Beautiful strong women love or at least like these men for no discernible reason.
I have to admit they are far more realistic than I first thought.