How will WB overreact this time?

I think yours is a better argument for critical reception than for BO revenue.  Pointing out that WW made money because it appealed to a specific audience is neither here nor there.  There was an audience for it, so it made money.  Case closed.  The critical reception is a bit more dubious from my perspective.  WW was a fun movie; it was also a paint by numbers rehash of Captain America: The First Avenger.  The major difference being its lead character is a female, a group historically underrepresented in the genre (and let's be honest, in action films in general).  



Did all that positive buzz inflate the BO take?  A little bit, sure. But WW kept on rolling, week after week.  That comes from word of mouth, not industry hype.  People enjoyed the film.  I certainly did; I saw it twice in theaters.  As I already mentioned, its biggest flaw is being a knockoff of CA:TFA.  As a whole, it's a solid picture.  Performances, cinematography, music, story (well, I'll admit the film's climax is incredibly weak) were all fantastic.  People weren't going to see it in its sixth week of release to support some feminist agenda, those people would've been there opening week.  



Circling back to your BO argument, I personally won't base any argument on a film's quality on BO gains.  Transformers movies make money (or at least they did) and they're terrible in my opinion.  Iron Man 3 is regarded as one of the lesser offerings from Marvel (which I disagree with, I love that flick) yet it made an enormous amount of money.  In fact, to the other guy's point, IM3 for example made a ton of goodwill money off of the Avengers, whereas WW had to follow an absolute stinker like BvS. 



If anything, WW was a refreshing change for WB/DC.  They finally made a movie everyone can enjoy.  Those 8 year old girls you're talking about kept going to see it because the woman was a lead in a good movie; not simply because the woman was a lead.