Her choice of background for this video and the matching imprint on her blouse gives us maybe a hint that "fundamental" physics is too broad a field to actually die :-) I.e., there are ongoing and deep puzzles e.g., in dark matter / dark energy where observational data keep accumulating and at some point a critical mass (pun) of evidence may reshape our ideas about how the universe fundamentally works. The new ideas need have nothing in common with pre-existing mind sets of how things work.

Now about the string theory / quantum gravity furore, after decades of work by arguably extremely bright people its pretty clear that Nature in the current juncture is not giving us enough clues to proceed. This should not be stressful - Nature is not a Hollywood production studio that needs to churn gee-wow "experiences" every season. But Sayre's law applies rather well [1] "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake.". What is at stake here is the ego of a few individuals that assumed otherwise (i.e., that a post-Einstein revolution is imminent) and the (relatively minor in the scheme of things) research funding of this particular niche of physics.

Theoretical physics is not the only domain bouncing regularly between "hypes" and "winters", as the recent Nobel prize for Physics clearly demonstrates.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre's_law