I think… The implausibility of the physical disguise creates a natural (and unresolvable?) conflict in terms of the
characterization of CK vs. Superman.
On the
one hand, Christopher Reeve was justly praised for his starkly different portrayals — such that, you could almost believe the two personas were two separate people. Consequently, the eyeglasses were just a small part of a much more immersive (and effective) disguise. The downside to this approach, however, is that Clark ended up being a hapless, comedic figure. And many fans would claim that the dorky/goofy interpretation is canonically incorrect — especially as CK is supposed to be an accomplished investigative journalist, second only to Lois Lane.
On the
other hand, making Clark more serious/realistic and less clownish, reduces the difference between CK and Supes. And it puts the onus back onto the physical disguise (essentially, the eyeglasses) as the place we hang our willing suspension of disbelief. Thus, we get portrayals like George Reeves, Dean Cain and Tyler Hoechlin, wherein there’s little distinction between the alter egos, apart from costume.
The Snyder films, arguably, addressed the problem by
avoiding it. I.e., the implausibility of the disguise was almost irrelevant because there were virtually no characters who interacted with
both CK and Supes. For example, Perry White (as far as we could tell) never met Superman; there was no Jimmy Olsen; and Lois, of course, already knew about the secret identities.
Now, if this alleged soft reboot is to be more “traditional,” I suppose we might see some amalgam/compromise of the above…
