That‘s the essence of it: a mainstream entertainment can only go so far in tackling a grave topic.
That’s not only a consideration of profits and the environment the sponsors want to see their products shown in. There’s also the very real risk of failure in the artistic intention and accusations of using such topics merely as a vehicle for the entertainment of a more or less brutalised audience.
I’m not sure a Bond film could really find that balance, doing the theme justice and still remain attractive to the broad audience. After all, there are countless real life horrors in our world which just refuse to be depicted in a casual, ‘entertaining’ manner, child abuse, rape and mutilation employed as war tactics, child soldiers, so on. We’ll never see them addressed - other than in a cursory fashion - in mainstream film, simply because they cannot feature in a story that’s meant to end for the viewers with a ‘happy end’.
By their very nature, by the DNA Fleming gave his works, Bond films are escapism - a fairytale for grownups. This can be a scary or even brutal story - but it’s not meant to be a story too close to reality.*
*To illustrate what I mean here: Fleming has been accused of sadism, especially in his first two books with their torture scenes. But Fleming, in his position during the war, has seen a number of real-life cases which were far more horrible, to the point of being unspeakable. He never understood that accusation and could rightfully claim that his books still remained on the very tame side of affairs.