It's a private board and there's a lot of NC-17 stuff on there, so I can't post a link, really.
Part of the problem is that the designers never quite climbed out of the wargaming rut. Even 3.5 is still primarily about how hard you are to hit, how long it takes you to break, and how well and how hard you can hit back. They tell you more about how to use minis than how to roleplay. The only reason it isn't a wargame is because the idea is for each player to play a single character rather than his own army.
Their only nod towards roleplay, really, is the concept of balancing. This introduced the other favorite element of D&D play everywhere: the designers' attempts to create spells and magic items that couldn't be viciously abused and the players' attempts to find ways in which they could viciously abuse them. It's also what keeps the foot solidly lodged in the door of the "What the hell? This makes no fucking sense." argument.
Could they have made the game more cinematic? Hell yeah. Just take a quick gander at Star Wars. Mechanics aside, even in that 'Jedi Counseling' column (or whatever it's called), on the WotC website, they keep going on and on how SW is supposed to be heroic and cinematic. D&D, conversely, is all about angles, numbers, and who can move far enough to do what, and when.
I just think it's worth pointing out the difference between a system in which you can /stage/ a cinematic action piece, and a system that /generally encourages/ all action to be cinematic, full of flair, whatnot, etc.
Soforth.
What do you think, gentle reader?