Standard fairy tales (almost by definition) are fully consistent with morals. Susanne Langer seems wrong. It is curious for her, having explored a lot the fields of symbolism and meaning, to perform such shallow lecture of the goal of fairy tales. She missed that...
We tell morals to our children by means of fairy tales.
There are many definitions of morals, but I have chosen here the one that best fits the current point (excluding the fact that this is the one I prefer by far, and that the definition best fits the current state of social affairs):
For Hobbes or Nietzsche, the goal of morals is survival. That means that morals are the rules that improve the probabilities of survival of the group and the individual. If you don't like this definition of morals, choose another and teach your children in consequence with it.
Now, how do we educate children, knowing that they will imitate whatever they learn? Do we teach them tales of losers, of defeat, of loss, of destruction? Do we try to give them "a dose of reality" every evening?
No. We tell children ideal stories, that represent the outcomes that lead to survival, peace, joy, reproduction, growth, conquer, geographical dominance, etc. So, we use fairy tales to teach morals, that is, what ideals, what rules they should follow in order to survive.
... (and we adults see movies/read books about justice being applied, about good leaders, about loyal women, etc.; always with good endings; we can't identify with bad endings, because we always, always, always look for good endings: it is blatantly evident that we want and need good endings, good meaning morally positive = for survival)...
So, we teach children how to be nice (because being nice allows them to interact better with others, to get better jobs, to be better in order to increase their personal net worth), how to be lovely (attraction increases survival probabilities, increases the probability of a beautiful partner, of wealth, sex, etc.), how to be loyal (loyalty forms good businessmen, and female loyalty ensures genetic transmission), how to make effort (effort creates positive differences), etc.
Love stories with happy endings have the goals of teaching children what to search in life: a peaceful and happy society, where they can reproduce and have as much children as possible, and have them happy, so the social group keeps existing.
Tales of beautiful princesses and strong kings have the goal of teaching children how they should be, what their ideal bodies should be, because beautiful women and powerful men have more probabilities of survival, reproduction, propagation.
Tales of happiness are intended to teach children what is the ideal behavior. Being happy, experiencing joy implies health, high capacity of building valuable social relationships, more social interaction, more sexual activity, etc.
In your question you refer to "making money" as if it would be bad. Making money is good. It does not mean literally making/printing bills, but satisfying others' needs. Making money with fairy tales is fine, it means that there are parents who want good (and 3D) teachings for their children, and they can even work and earn money, and give it to you, for that.
Some movie studios try to introduce political positions, gender ideologies, etc. in fairy tales movies. This is not immoral because it "gender ideologies are bad". It might be immoral because kids growing with political ideologies opposite to what lead us to survival might cause modern societies to self-destroy. Ideologies that seem OK on the paper are ALWAYS tested by nature in the field, using the survival of the fittest rule. You bad? You die. There are many examples in history.