I liked Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. I didn't love it.
The premise behind the Caped Crusader and the Man of Steele's grudge match seems far-fetched. And since the entire movie relies on that story line, it was hard to get behind it. I'm not a comic book aficionado, so maybe this was a true feud at some point in superhero history, but for me, I wanted to see the two unite and fight the real bad guys.
But what I would have really loved is to see Wonder Woman getting more screen time. Why is she merely a sidekick of sorts to Batman and Superman? Why don't Diana Prince and her crime-fighting alter ego already have their own movie?
Wonder Woman will get top billing with her own flick in June 2017, but why have we been made to wait so long?
Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman is so friggin' badass.
Even Ben Affleck has admitted that he and Henry Cavill can't compete with the Amazonian warrior. "I didn't want to make a movie where the guys were the heroes and the women were the damsels in distress," Affleck told E! News last week. "[Wonder Woman] comes in and was more heroic than the both of us."
I guess Warner Bros. figured they needed Batman v Superman to introduce audiences to Wonder Woman.
But do we really need an introduction? We all know who Wonder Woman is. She actually made her first appearance in the comics back in December 1941. Wonder Woman is able to stand on her own. She doesn't need Batman and Superman to give her cred.
In fact, a new fan survey conducted by Fandango showed that 88 percent of those who responded said they were most "excited to finally see Wonder Woman on the big screen."
The first Wonder Woman movie is an origins story being directed by Patty Jenkins of the Oscar-winning Monster. Gadot's co-stars include Robin Wright, Connie Nielsen and Lisa Loven Kongsli. Wonder Women, indeed.
Just take a look at the $1.4 million that the Hunger Games franchise rang in at the box office. If Katniss Everdeen could do it, so could Wonder Woman.