But many of those nominees are the exact thing many posters in this thread are asking for; the high art, more original, more creative films.
I agree and disagree with the major sentiment of this thread. Yes, the major studio players are more worried about making cash-cow movies, the next big franchise flick, the next billion-dollar grosser. So they have turn towards more attempts at widespread appeal popcorn flicks. That's because, especially since COVID, these are the only movies the average audience show up to see.
But original, high art, more creative (whatever you want to call it) films are still being made, many of them each and every year. You just have to look to the indie space and foreign market. If this is what you like, then you have to seek them out in local arthouse theaters or wait for home video/streaming options. No, AMC is not going to fill a megaplex up with these movies because they don't make money. It is still a business and "Hollywood" has always been in the business of making money.
It's always funny when I see people talking about how great movies were decades ago or in the good ole days. Duck Soup was blasted by critics and audiences at the time of its release and bobed at the box office. Now, decades later, it is on almost every all-time greatest lists. That's just one of many, many, many examples over the entire history of the movies. Another... the recent Star Wars films were brought up. It's fine if you don't like them but I have enjoyed most SW related content that Disney has released (accept the Bobba Fett, Obi-wan and Acolyte series). I also remember how much hated was thrown at Episode 1 when it was released in 1999 but, now many Star Wars fans say it is not that bad. My point, Hollywood has always made low brow, bad movies to try and make a buck. Decades later we mainly remember the goods ones and not the bad so our view of that time period changes.