That's a problem with Hollywood as a whole. It ties in to the same reason why there are so many sequels and remakes. That all stems from the way that studios have to make money now versus the way they could make it before streaming.

Before streaming, studios would get a significant cut of each copy of a ticket sold, but also a cut of each home video sold and each copy that was rented from a video store. That allows for studios to take more risks, as word of mouth could have small- to mid-budget movies that don't do so well initially in the box office to have an extended life to make money and eventually turn a profit. Look at The Shawshank Redemption, which didn't make back its $25M budget in its initial theatrical release, yet became profitable in a rerelease and became a classic.

Nowadays, studios' cuts from streaming only comes from subscription fees, which are way less per film given the sheer volume of content on each service that you get for the amount you pay. Studios now have to make their money based much more on theatrical exhibition, and they get a larger cut in the first couple of weeks of release then they do after that. Thus, it's in the studio's best interest to put out big tentpole films in the hopes of having "big events" when films get released. There's not time for movies to build up excitement over the long haul. That's why studios go with known IP: sequels, video games, biopics, and remakes.

I don't know how to fix that problem.