So you actually take issue with the cheap and nasty fashion in which those problematic tropes are realised against a dark background of easy funding for what you consider amounts to inartful narrative explorations? I'm just trying to get a handle on what you are driving at.
Like I said, the conversation about what constitutes art, creativity and marketability is an old one. Value can be attributed to the sublime and the shallow. Sometimes the sublime is the shallow.
Sure, one can concentrate on the marketability of one's ideas over the narrative coherency and end up with a popular, shallow product which infuriates some observers, but it is exactly because of that that I'm stressing the importance of paying attention to the structure and effect of the narrative device (whatever it may be) so as to achieve success in both the artfulness of the production and by measurement of that through achievement in the marketplace, financial success.
That's not to say financial motivations cannot drive the production of good art, just that to focus solely on that motivation tends to lead to the kinds of problems you seem to have with the trope in the first place.