They're still being made, they're just niche now. Part of why, at least per an argument I heard that I think made some good points, is a reflection on how the internet has changed information sharing. Satire/Spoof works best when there are concrete objects or ideas to work off. In an era of fairly limited media, people didn't have anywhere near the exposure to the variety of ideas and things that they have today. It was easier to have these concrete narratives and archetypes that were direct, simple, easily understood, and also easy to mock for that reason.

In the internet age, however, things are more chaotic. There are more perspectives, more experiences, more narratives, they are different and cover a much wider spectrum of human experience. In that environment, it's much harder to have a concrete idea of anything, really, and as a result, straight spoof/satire starts to feel less effective. It can still work just fine subject-to-subject, but those subjects are less likely to be things we can all relate to or understand.

Meanwhile, the things that are pitched to the maximum audience aren't taking themselves that seriously either so again, the idea of a concrete idea to be made fun of is just less available to spoof on. The Last Jedi(drink!) for instance, jokes like Luke tossing his lightsaber or the phone prank are straight out of Family Guy, so what's left for a satirist to do at that point other than tackle the more niche subjects that appeal to specific demographics and leave the general audience stuff alone.

And that's not even to mention the effect the internet has had on humor via memes and the sort of postmodern/dadaist stuff. Memetic humor could almost be thought of as 'post-satire' in its concept and execution, but it services the chaotic nature of internet information sharing perfectly. For movies, though, this results in the unfortunate effect where improv and pop culture referencing is dropped in in place of comedy writing.