I'm not sure, I disagree with this... I think, although I'm not sure where exactly where I fall on this scale. I think the "it's not a toy commercial" is dangerously close to becoming as much of a crutch to explain why a movie bombed as "marketing". Sure, it's beyond difficult for movies nowadays to reach blockbuster-level grosses (say, 150M+ domestic, 400M+ WW) without being "toy commercials/movie universe setups". But that's not what even those who were optimistic about a movie like Babylon would have expected.
Take a look at Smile. 100M+ horror hit, 215M WW. And it wasn't sold as a toy commercial or a movie universe. What happened was that it had an easily-marketable hook, and audiences liked it. Even Violent Night was in the same book. M3GAN. And I'm sure many others if you go back over the years. Wolf of Wall Street could be seen as similar to Babylon (crazy, over the top, star-studded, etc.), but the difference there is that the marketing had a clear "hook" for audiences. Plus, I think overall, people liked that movie more than Babylon (granted , I haven't seen Babylon, this is just based off of anecdotal evidence). So it's no wonder that movie grossed 10x what Babylon did.