Are these responses from top journals just boiler plate? or anything atleast miniscule to salvage from them?
I think you should treat them as honest statements. They may be boilerplate, of course, since journals often get more submissions than are possible to publish on any reasonable time scale. They therefor have such &quot;boilerplate&quot; ready to ease the editor's work.
The first implies something lacking in the paper itself wrt the standards of that journal, though the paper may have merit otherwise. The second doesn't necessarily imply the same.
But, an exceptional paper, by their standards, would probably be put into the process.
As they suggest, move on with the paper and try for a different venue. Alternatively, improve it dramatically and try again.