On the one hand, Aristotle is held in high regard by modern philosophers. For example, in the PhilPapers survey, Aristotle comes second after Hume in the list of "Non-living philosophers most identified with". Or take that snippet from Classical Philosophy by Peter Adamson:
In 2005 the BBC conducted a poll in which people were invited to vote for the greatest philosopher of all time. About 30,000 people voted, and the eventual winner was Karl Marx. (Yeah, I know.) Anyway, while this was going on I mentioned it to a colleague of mine, who is also a historian of philosophy. He said, “What a strange idea!” I asked him why he thought it was strange and, after a moment’s consideration, he said, ‘Well, to begin with, the answer is so obviously Aristotle.’” I pointed out that the poll wasn’t to name the most influential philosopher of all time, but the greatest philosopher of all time. He said, “Oh, I see. But … still, the answer is so obviously Aristotle!”
On the other hand, modern philosophers (and scientists) abundantly use Aristotle's theories as examples of archaic and discredited ideas. Teleology, Aristotelian physics (e.g. the impossibility of the vacuum), Aristotelian cosmology (the concept of the "sublunary sphere"), essentialism, his political views (slavery as natural, women = "deformed males"), the concept of eudaimonia etc. are all viewed with various grades of contempt.
How can one explain this apparent paradox? I wouldn't be surprised if modern philosophers see Aristotle as influential yet for the negative - but he is seen as a great philosopher.