You can't point to mischaracterization on an adaptation of a character that has been in existence for 75 years and has been portrayed to have all manner of different personality traits.The collateral damage and unreal fight outcomes aren't the main problems with the movie, they are just easier to notice and put into words for non film experts. The damage is also the topic of this thread. These problems becone all the more glaring when you have the issues with pacing, editing and mischaracterization of well known characters that cause story problems throughout the film. I've already said my biggest problem with the movie is that the story isn't told effectively to show this rookie Superman that is on the road to become the Superman we all know.
Even going into the movie assuming that the character should act a certain way and then being disappointed when he doesn't is more a reflection on your unrealistic expectations than any fault of the film.
The basic character traits of Superman were there: super-powered alien who helps people. And nothing in that movie precludes him eventually becoming the Dudley Do Right in tights that most people expect him to be.
It would be like saying the Marvel movies suck because Tony Stark acts more like the Ultimate version than the 616 version of the character or that Captain America is more the classic 616 version instead of the Ultimate version or that Hawkeye is not Hawkeye by any stretch of the imagination in the films. As long as the core of the characters remain then the adaptation is free to take them in whatever direction is necessary to tell the story.