I was trying to explain sci-fi to normies some time ago and I was listing classics (Robocop, Mad Max, Logan's Run, Rollerball, Escape from New York) and more recent works (Ergo Proxy, Dark City). I noticed that I was using the phrase "dystopian police state" frequently. It struck me that a lot of sci-fi that might be labeled "dystopian" is really not absolutely dystopian.
When sci-fi depicts a society that is functional enough to support a police state, it may well be dystopian, but it's probably not postapocalyptic, even if some major transitions have happened.
Consider Demolition Man, Escape from New York, Rollerball, Logan's Run, and Robocop. These depict functioning, sustainable societies with considerable hedonism and high standards of living for most people. They are not absolute dystopias. All of them might be called "police states" but none of them are as bad as 1984. Further, all of them seem to have made the transition from 20th century to future world without going through any total social breakdown. These future worlds appear to have been implemented in civilized ways, with little or no disruption to commerce or food production. (Although perhaps the society in Logan's Run had some severe issues with its food production before it settled on the recycling technologies revealed in the middle of the movie.)
Even the first Mad Max movie was not postapocalyptic; it depicted a society in crisis, but the most important breakdown was Max's personal ethical breakdown. Even though Max broke, his society appeared to be more-or-less intact by the end of the first movie.
The second Mad Max movie depicts a classic postapocalyptic Hobbesian war of all against all. Society is so dysfunctional that people don't appear to have any systematic commerce or food production. This movie stands out as an exception: very few movies depict this level of total social breakdown.
The third Mad Max pulled back from the abyss of nonproductive scavenging. Bartertown had systematic commerce and methane production from sustainable pig farms. Possibly this was to shock the viewers with the notion of renewable energy from methane (which was not exactly a mainstream idea in 1986) but possibly this was done just because it's damn hard to depict a long-lasting Hobbesian struggle of all versus all. Eventually the audience will start asking how Lord Humongous manages to scavenge enough canned dog food to feed his tribe.
For the creator of Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome, a sustainable methane-powered society might have looked semi-utopian in comparison to mass starvation.
Along these lines, I looked back at a lot of supposedly "postapocalyptic" stories and realized that "apocalypse" requires total breakdown of food production and commerce. If society keeps producing and selling food, then the crisis is just a transition, and what comes afterward may be semi-utopian.