Well, the time for that kind of discussion will be when it actually exists and is out there, not now when it doesnt even have a script or a director, yeah? And guess what, if it bombs, it's still going to be the studio's fault, either because of a bad marketing campaign, a poor response to the preceding appearance of the character in Batman v Superman, or just a plain bad film. This is Wonder Woman we're talking about, even though most people don't know much about her the name recognition factor should be a given. It's up to WB to actually make something that people want to go and see, and which enters the pop-cultural zeitgeist the way The Dark Knight did back in 2008. Remember that? The story was "You gotta see this movie!" or "Have you seen The Dark Knight yet, it was awesome!". Man of Steel on the other hand, that was more like "You shouldn't take your kids to see this" or "That's a really dreary film" or "It was loud and obnoxious at the end". That's why after the first weekend the movie failed to draw the same crowds it had in the first few days, it's why TDK and Avengers made a billion and Man of Steel didn't.
I have some sympathy for the argument that 'the audience' is to blame when an original film like say, 'Edge of Tomorrow' or 'Pacific Rim' underperforms, as so much Sci-fi does these days, because audiences, particularly American ones, are more reluctant to spend money on things they don't recognise. You can't make that argument for a superhero movie from one of the world's major studios about a widely recognisable icon appearing on toys, t-shirts and make-up kits. At all. So don't even try. Make a good superheroine film and we'll turn up. Try to sell us a turkey and we'll take our money elsewhere.