Regarding space sci-fi in particular, the image of a human manually piloting a space ship is iconic in both Western and Soviet fiction. Before the advent of real world human spaceflight era, it could be linked both to the lack of understanding of computers and other technical systems, along with the eternal popularity of the heroic explorer/captain/pilot archetype. However, even as public knowledge of space exploration has advanced, this portrayal persists in fiction.

We humans just like good engaging stories, even if they are not always realistic.

It might still make sense to pilot a ship manually for landing or proximity operations.

Even deep space maneuvers can be done manually if you know what you are doing - point ship engines in right direction and thrust for right number of seconds/minutes.

Sure, for stuff like orbital launch, some crazier Oberth effect burns or continuous thrust propulsion (ion, solar sail) you definitely want computer control.

For modern spacecraft such as Dragon capsule, almost all operations are completely automated by default: launch, landing, ISS docking. Manual overrides exist, but they are intended to be used only as a backup in case of a computer failure.

I can see an argument for manual landing on another cosmic body, given the famous story of Neil Armstrong saving Apollo 11 landing by manually landing the capsule. Though the latest generation of lunar landers can perform the procedure fully autonomously, using machine vision to find an optimal landing spot.

I tried looking up, whether manual or automated moon landing is planned for HLS program, but couldn't find anything specific. It's probably going to be some mix of both.

Probably more like AI doing everything and very few humans overriding a few things here and there, negative things.