Ha, um, no. That's more or less the definition of a Zelda game. Or at least, the dungeon bit. Dungeons can definitely be changed up (TP had monkeys in the Forest Temple and Big Key Shards in the Goron Mines), but that's never been the part of the formula that's stale.
Zelda is a great series because its formula works- and the failure of its DS entries is because of the loss of the crucial element of a Zelda game- exploration. When the world is empty save for dungeons and hub areas, the whole "explore the world until you find the next dungeon, using the new item you got" part is cut out and needs replacing- in the DS games by a shallow on-rails minigame and a repetitive stealth-based dungeon.
Really, what Zelda needs is to actually stick to the formula and execute it with the series' typical aplomb. The DS entries suffered because they omitted the overworld and shrunk the inventory, WW suffered because they omitted free transportation, and most other titles suffered only due to a lack of adding to the formula- the Oracles and TP suffered from repeating previous mechanics as new gimmicks (lightworld/darkworld for OoX, Eye of Truth/Shovel/Roc's Cape for TP), and MM suffered a bit from the lack of a truly epic, heroic tale.
So Zelda formula: Create a rich and varied overworld filled with various dungeons; motivate the player with an epic, heroic quest; add a gimmick without using it to replace anything else, and have the player progress through the game by using their own arsenal and abilities to explore the world.
(Interestingly, Okami executes this formula impressively- hence all of the comparisons to Zelda titles. It's the same experience stripped of the usual series trappings.)
