Less positive, unfortunately.
My problem with the film is mainly in its structure. Simply put, the film lacks tension and Clark has no agency in his own narrative. The main question put forth by the film is "Can or should Clark be Superman?"
The problem is the non-linear structure of the film answers this question in the very first scene we see with Clark, when he saves the workers at the oil rig. So any tension regarding whether Clark will save people in the flashbacks is cancelled by the fact the film has already answered the question for us.
Regarding the city fight. My problem is less that the fight lead to wanton destruction so much as it is Clark (and the film) don't seem to care. MoS doesn't care about the people of Metropolis, it cares about how hard Clark can punch Zod. In the aftermath of the fight we don't see the devastation, Clark is never held accountable for his actions, Clark himself seems unaware of how many people died.
The film is so muddled by flashbacks in the first half (with annoying use of shaky cam in inappropriate moments) that the plot doesn't even begin until Zod sends his message down to the humans at the half-way mark. Clark isn't doing anything until the villains show up and hand him the plot.
The film is not without its good points. Those being the excellent casting (especially Zod) and Zimmer's score has its moments as well.
The film is very much interested in what Jor-El and John Kent want and their perspective, I agree. If only it cared about what Clark wanted.... or actually gave him anything to care about.
Also to touch on the Jesus thing briefly. It lacks any subtlety or nuance.* The problem is that MoS doesn't do anything interesting with this theme.
Sorry if this is a unintelligible ramble. My intent wasn't to make anyone feel bad for liking the film, just my two cents.