Science fiction without social commentary

I'm a big fan of science fiction in general but the thing I've never liked about it is all the social commentary that is often crammed into the so-called classics of science fiction like 1984, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451 etc. 
I'm more interested in the rest of it, the mythos of whatever world it may take place in. For example I'm a big fan of Star Trek and yes I know it has social commentary but it has so much more, like all the different cultures and languages and traditions of the different races, the technology on the ships and how it works etc and that's what interests me. 
 
So, I am looking for some books or maybe movies that focus on that aspect of science fiction. Lately I've been reading some Warhammer 40K novels which are really good and I very much like the setting and the history/lore of Warhammer 40K in general. 
Maybe something similar to that or something completely different that matches what I described, please give me suggestions.

Thats kinda tough because most of Science Fiction is all about social commentary. All the best novel series and writers were just as concerned about sending a message one way or the other. Sci Fi allows for those points of views to be shown in their extremes by reflecting it in exaggerated technology and race relations. All the big names like Asimov and Bradbury loved science but also loved exploring humanism and how our own minds can be our best friend and worst enemies.
 
 That being said the first couple of Dune novels are excellent and is more concerned about setting up a cool adventure in a completely original world. Just avoid everything after Dune Messiah. Same goes for the first books in the Enders Game series though that one has a larger moral point its used as a way to keep the plot going. 
 
You said you liked Star Trek so go with the Star Trek novels. Or Star Wars. Theres enough material there to last awhile and its all of the same tone as the movies so you know what kind of experience youre going for. Though to actively ignore classics that have something to say seems a tad misguided. Youre just gonna end up wading through a lot of mediocrity. But whatever floats your boat. 

I can't tell you enough how much I hate your avatar.

"

I can't tell you enough how much I hate your avatar.

"

"   That being said the first couple of Dune novels are excellent and is more concerned about setting up a cool adventure in a completely original world. Just avoid everything after Dune Messiah.  "

The best science fiction I ever read was the first two Red Dwarf books. I must have read each one like seven times. Unfortunately they're out of print, but last time I checked you can still find them online.

Hmm...unfortunately a lot of assholes (i.e. writers) decided that just establishing an interesting world with interesting characters isn't enough.  I like you am sick and tired of well not only sci-fi but pretty much everything having a ham-fisted and/or unnecessary message.  Often times this is a product of a time that seeks to decry things that are either obvious or often over-simplified even if they warrant criticism.  I much prefer more interpretative messages in fiction that allow you to find a message without it beating you over the head with it if you choose to read into it that much.
 
Sadly I am much of a reader relative to my video game play and prefer the experience of sci-fi through my games to be honest.  I am not the one to recommend books to someone.  Game-wise all I can think of that fits your description is the Mass Effect franchise and Dawn of War II.  Sorry.

Well no Stranger In a Strange Land for you.

Hmm, I often enjoy the social commentary in sci-fi stuff, especially Phillip K. Dick's novels.  They're basically all about social commentary.

If you're not into social commentary, then sci-fi really isn't the genre for you. Social commentary is ostensibly as much a part of sci-fi as science itself.
 
That being said, the Hitchhiker's Guide series.

all of the best sci-fi has social commentary. it's what makes it so interesting in most cases.
 
but so does a lot of the worst, come to think of it. actually next to all sci-fi has social commentary of some sort so if you actually want to read good science fiction and not just low-grade pulp, you're going to have to tolerate or appreciate the commentary.

Richard Morgan's stuff is mostly for entertainment as opposed to social commentary (though he does dish out some social commentary, particularly against the government).  I'm also a big fan of David Gunn, who writes sci-fi war fiction that's really entertaining without being too mentally taxing.  I'm guessing you're going to be more of a Gunn fan, so give him a go first. 
 
EDIT: A great place to start would be to find some fiction you do enjoy, hop on Amazon, look up that particular book or author, and then skim through what authors and books are recommended alongside that one.  For example, I've never read Ian Douglas, but his books came up when I checked Death's Head's page on Amazon, so I'm guessing he too writes sci-fi action stuff.  Good luck!

" If you're not into social commentary, then sci-fi really isn't the genre for you. Social commentary is ostensibly as much a part of sci-fi as science itself.  That being said, the Hitchhiker's Guide series. "

Yeah Dune is nothing but social commentary :/ More then half the books contents are just politics and economics heh
Still love them tho.

I truly recommend looking up Peter F. Hamilton's books.
The Night's Dawn trilogy might be a bit too heavy to start with but it and also ones like The Fallen Dragon / Pandora's Star / Judas Unchained are really cool books that focus more on the setting then the social commentary, it's still there  but not to a degree that some other writers like to go to.
(that's unavoidable, even Warhammer 40k has it if you think about it, stagnation of progress under tyrant emeror / chaos as extreme of freedom, etc)

Also Lord of the Rings is social commentary on the industrial revolution and the world war :P

2001: A Space Odyssey, greatest sci-fi movie ever

I'm approaching the topic from a slightly different approach. 
 
I imagine it's hard for science fiction NOT to be commentary in one way or another. First, I think it's because the "science fiction" part itself is some sort of idealization of something more contemporary. Whether you envision a more realistic future as more "utopian" or "distopian", it will be commentary one way or another. If you address just the technology, the applications themselves have very social implications, whether it's cybernetics, weaponry, travel, communications (cyber-brain chat anyone?) etc... because these things do have social impact. Creating sci-fi like Star Wars tends to lean on the more fantasy-side of things, BUT... then it usually focuses more on "human drama" or interplay between characters, because, even if the world is very alien, we still need a point of universal reference that anyone can follow, that being the drama, conflict, and relationship. 
 
Even 2001: A Space Odyssey, focuses on humanity's greater place in the universe, as a species (at least, you can get the greater context from the novel). That, too, can easily be taken as socio-political commentary. I guess, what I'm trying to do is: how exactly do we make sci-fi NOT commentary, if everything can be commentary? 

"

I can't tell you enough how much I hate your avatar.

"

@Feigr: 

So you want the believable world, characters and lore without the subtext? Sounds like you should be reading fantasy novels, not sci-fi, although they're are alot of fantas novels that also have a "message". Just my two cents though.    

any sort of conflict at all can be taken as social commentary.  Any sort of interaction between anyone or anything is social commentary.  What you want is insanely boring.

Pure pulp is more fun. You can come up with interesting ideas attempting to devise a message and often at the expense of taking something to its full potential. Philip K Dick did that all the time. Came up with something and stopped short of full potential because he got his message across. 
I've been watching a lot of MST3k lately and I've found Im oddly in love with a lot of these clearly bad movies because they have absolutely no pretense or greater goal. There is a certain level of purity you get in scifi when you take out the preachy bullshit. I don't need a cautionary tale inserted into a story about moon men. Moon men don't exist. So the idea that scifi requires commentary is stupid. Futurism perhaps. But once you throw in some bullshit like aliens, you don't need to be saying anything. 

" any sort of conflict at all can be taken as social commentary.  Any sort of interaction between anyone or anything is social commentary.  What you want is insanely boring. "

Ha ha, "science fiction without social commentary".

" Pure pulp is more fun. You can come up with interesting ideas attempting to devise a message and often at the expense of taking something to its full potential. Philip K Dick did that all the time. Came up with something and stopped short of full potential because he got his message across. I've been watching a lot of MST3k lately and I've found Im oddly in love with a lot of these clearly bad movies because they have absolutely no pretense or greater goal. There is a certain level of purity you get in scifi when you take out the preachy bullshit. I don't need a cautionary tale inserted into a story about moon men. Moon men don't exist. So the idea that scifi requires commentary is stupid. Futurism perhaps. But once you throw in some bullshit like aliens, you don't need to be saying anything.  "

The social commentary behind Starcraft II is that Blizzard wants all your money.