Her main point is that Snyder's superman is missing the empathetic quality that would allow the audience to fully relate to him; and consequently he's also portrayed as a mechanical god, superior to us in the ways that (in her view of what's missing) don't "really" matter (ie, brawn, but no heart).

Undermining the main point is fairly easy: Snyder's superman is a villain (mostly). But beyond that: the idea of a superman whose opinion of us is gradually eroded by the ungrateful burden we represent, is... simply interesting. It's also rare. And that makes it even more interesting, imo.

To exemplify the other point – which is that (presumably as a result of de-soul-ing him) this depiction of the superman comes across as gaudy, idolatrous, as if emphasizing his godliness beyond the more human (read: empathetic) Reeves-era version - she inserts documentary clips of Neil deGrasse et al describing superman as something which appears in our lives to alert us to the fact that we are not special, and that there's something superior/above us out there.

I weigh these points in my mind. What is the more likely "god"? The one that patiently, almost omnisciently, persists in teaching us to be kind to kitties, despite all the shit he's seen our species be capable of, with no end in sight? Or the one whose exposure to our callousness has ground him down to the point of... what... a few dead baddies and some extra-crumbled buildings? (Oh boy, wouldn't we be lucky if that was all?) Which of these seems more "above us" and which of these seems more "on our level"? It's not that complicated. (This is also why, for example, the camera tends to ignore the humans in those shots... the camera is taking on his pov, not ours, which is the point.)