Fantasy did dominate a decade (albeit, shared domination with sci-fi). It was the 80's. You might remember these Conan 1 and 2, Legend, LadyHawk, Excalibur, Princess Bride, Willow, Labyrinth, The Dark Crystal, Neverending Story, Krull, Beastmaster, He-Man the movie, Time Bandits, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Big Trouble in Little China, Clash of the Titans, Highlander, Return to Oz (kind of creepy for an Oz film), Brazil, Gremlins, The Black Cauldron, The Secret of Nimh, The Golden Child, Big, Red Sonja, Fire and Ice, Heavy Metal, The Gate, and DragonSlayer.

Honorable Mentions (stuff that bridges the gap between scifi/fantasy still in the 80's)
Ghostbusters 1 and 2, Poltergeist

Even though those films might qualify for some, i've left out space opera's which would include Star Wars ep. 5 and 6, Dune, Flash Gordon

Interesting that you say The Hobbit is your all-time favorite. I enjoyed it, but not really as much as I enjoyed LotR (except for the Tom Bombadil bit which was weird)

Ooh yes, I've been meaning to see Willow for a very long time. I was always fascinated by it's box cover in the video store :)

Swords and Sorcery doesn't have mainstream appeal. The recurring tropes and content is just too much for general audiences to wrap their heads around. It requires a great deal of suspension of disbelief often without the recurring spectacle inherent to the action or scifi flick which can make the genre look ridiculous if handled improperly. This is why it is a popular genre for young audiences in mainstream media. This is why outlandish parodies are popular in mainstream fantasy. It's hard to get people to take the material seriously so why not make them laugh at it anyway?

Swords and Sorcery has all the makings of blockbuster hits if it weren't for that barrier to entry. Today, however, I think it is more likely than ever for fantasy to become blockbuster mainstays with modern production values being capable of presenting it. We've already seen this, with successful serious fantasies like LotR, Harry Potter and heck even Twilight but the genre as a whole hasn't quite taken. There were a lot of "me too" follow ups to LotR's success that didn't quite take. One could still make the case that turn of the century cinema was dominated by fantasy.

Meanwhile, there were tentative gains in superhero adaptations. But that trend has only really taken off once Marvel and Disney partnered up to drive it home. And Disney is really the sole driving force behind the superhero movie presence in the box office. Everyone else either got the ball rolling or are following along. One would think that comic book superheroes have the same barrier to entry and suspension problems that fantasy has, but Disney has managed to adapt Marvel's source material into the MCU in such a way that it doesn't alienate audiences (something they are historically really really good at).

This means that swords and sorcery could have its day. It could certainly be given its due if anyone was up to it. But right now the superhero is trending. Maybe next decade assuming the world hasn't fallen apart by then?

Argh.. Stardust, that horrible clichè mess that makes no sense at all?
"Son, I am disappoint".

.
The Hobbit movies were fun, but surely not great.

.
I wouldn't say "dominate".. but maybe you're right.
The '80s were a great time for such movies.
(even if most were for kids)

I just wish they would stop remaking great 80's movies into modern trash. Conan, Star Wars, Robocop, the Thing, Total Recall, Terminator. I cant say I am impressed in the slightest with this latest generation of movie makers. Wheres the visionaries like Lucas, Spielburg, Carpenter, Ridley, Cameron?

Aren't you the guy who likes Arrow? Yeah.. you don't get to be dissapointed in anyone :D And Stardust is a very good movie. It's fun, it looks great, the cast is perfect and it's mostly faithful to the novel.

I don't think most of those were for kids. Some, of course, like Neverending Story or Labirynth, but even those have more of a all-ages appeal I think, with a lot to discover on repeated viewings later in your life. Really, pretty much all of the movies Trajhenkhetlive mentioned (crappy Masters of the Universe and Conan the Destroyer excluded) are either that, or "adult" movies that kids can also safely watch and enjoy, even if they don't geth everything on every level (Excalubur, HIghlander and Baron Munchhausen).

Still, while there were many, I don't think it could be said they "dominated". Most of those enjoyed a limited box office succes at best, or were outright flops at worst. Still, I'd much rather have movies like that return, than have the genre "dominate" at the cost of becoming empty, cookie-cutter Marvel-style blockbusters.

LOL They're all remaking *their* great 70s-80s movies into modern trash! XD

Eh? No..

Sorry, got you confused with someone. Probably similar avatars, or just my brain being wonky.

For the fans of Pan's Labirynth- I think this may be something to look forward too.

Well as far as being produced and released Fantasy dominated in the 80's. How many westerns from the 50's and 60's were memorable? That don't matter though. They dominated that decade. Also keep in mind more than one genre can dominate a decade. For example, in the 50's the horror monster schlock dominated as well. Now if your curious as to what financially dominated the box office for the decade of the 80's;

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982), $435 million
Return of the Jedi (1983), $309 million
The Empire Strikes Back (1980), $290 million
Batman (1989), $251 million
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), $245 million
Ghostbusters (1984), $238 million
Beverly Hills Cop (1984), $234 million
Back to the Future (1985), $210 million
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989), $197 million
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984), $179 million

4 sci fi films, 1 "superhero" film, 1 cop dramady, 1 scifi/fantasy, 3 low fantasy (arguably more action adventure but they have a fair bit of fantasy elements)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_in_film#Top-grossing_films

Oh, god, I forgot about this

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/king-arthur/256982/king-arthur-features-jude-law-as-villainous-uncle

This is going to be a disaster. I can't shake that feeling. Guy Ritchie is the last guy who should be doing a serious King Arthur movie, and pretty much everything I hear about how they are reworking the arthurian legend in this just makes my skin crawl. I love the arthurian mythos. Whether it's Boorman's Excalibur, the Sam Neill TV movie, Steinbeck's or White's novels or the folk tales from the Mabinogion, I have tremendous love and respect for those stories, and the superb works of modern fiction they've been reworked into. But the action movie Guy Ritchie approach, with Arthur being growing up on the streets and what not, it all sounds like they're going to take a dump all over the mythos.

I'm not against Ritchie doing a fantasy movie, if he was directing the new D&D movie I might actuallly find it a good choice, but not this. I do hope it will somehow surprise me like Warcraft did this year.