There are many arguments about what is "real" SF but, in my opinion, science fiction is no different in its aims to
any other fiction - to tell a story that examines some aspect of the human condition, in an unusual or unique way. In that regard, the only difference between
2001 and
Star Wars, or for that matter
Blade Runner and
Citizen Kane is what aspect of humanity is being examined. Any fiction that fails to do this is generally quickly discarded as meaningless.
Like many others here, I despise stupidity in the movies and TV - that's why I find the likes of Armageddon so appalling - but when the storyline is compelling, then I'm happy to accept spacecraft flying like WWII Spitfires, loud bangs in space and sword fighting with energy beams. It's all about the premise. In Star Wars, the premise is that determination and belief in oneself can overcome the most powerful opposition. In Armageddon, the premise is that if you spend enough money on visual effects, you can make enough people sit through a pile of impossible, meaningless dross and still make a profit.
