I haven't seen the movie, but National Review has a piece on their site criticizing it as leftist propaganda.
You mean
This one?
People can stop reading at this line from the review:
Instead, the film’s subtitle recalls the 1972 documentary Winter Soldier, in which Vietnam veterans repented their battlefield violence.
The idiot reviewer really has no idea about the origins of the term "Winter Soldier" both as a term and in the context of the Captain America story. He runs straight (do not pass go, do not collect $200) to the appropriation of it by Vietnam Vets Against the War. Maybe we should all hate the Christian Cross too, because of how the Klan uses it?
Instead the reviewer champions "Man of Steel," where Superman helps lay waste to a major metropolitan area (killing, in a reasonable hypothetical estimate, around 180,000 people), but has a major emotional breakdown when forced to make the decision to kill the megalomaniacal fellow Kryptionian who, in the macro, tried to wipe out all human life on Earth and, in the micro, is about to incinerate a family using his heat-ray vision.
So the basic premise of the review (Marvel's characters are too conflicted, DC's aren't) is false. The details of the review (this is AMERICA, we pass on the LEFT) are wrong. The context assumed by the review ("Winter Soldier") is wrong.
Now, I didn't mind Man of Steel and the mass destruction as much as others did (I figure that's a lead in to the future Superman/Batman and Justice League movies). But I'll still take the guy who breaks into the frikkin' Smithsonian to steal his old WWII uniform because it's needed as a symbol of AMERICA for taking down the emerging surveillance/police state.