I just wanted to point out that there have been complaints about remakes for ages:. Here is an article from 1994 about them:
Remakes have no better track record than original movies. Yet they continue to be made.
www.latimes.com
Maybe the scope or scale is worse now, but the underlying problem itself isn't.
The difference is in those days remakes were a part of the equation not the main event, there was original content being released on a regular basis, movie franchises were generally active without thirty-forty year gaps, and you had the B-tier studios like Orion, Lionsgate, New Line, etc. that kept Hollywood in line to stay original and creative.
Nowadays the "model" is to bring back these legacy characters, put them in the same situations they were already in, call out memorable moments, and have a daughter/son or someone similar deconstruct and call them out. We've seen it with Luke Skywalker, Jean-Luc Picard, Indiana Jones, and I'm sure there's some of it with Axel Foley.
It's boring and predictable. Not every legacy character needs to be brought back or be made to be this outdated miserable talked down to past their prime shell of their former selves. You know what would be a good idea? Have one of these characters just be living a normal life and called back into duty. They can be "rusty" but not miserable. They sort of did that with Captain Riker in Picard until they went full Fan Service.