To date, there have been six feature films based on Star Trek, four based on Star Trek: The Next Generation, and three set in a rebooted timeline (dubbed the Kelvin timeline by fans). These 13 films were all released theatrically from 1979 to 2016, so on average, one film every three years. Next up, Star Trek: Section 31, is set to release on Paramount+ sometime in 2025 and will be the first Star Trek TV movie. There has also long been talk of making a fourth film set in the Kelvin timeline, but the fate of that film is currently a question mark; I’ll believe it when I see it.

For a long time, the general consensus was that the odd-numbered Star Trek films were bad and unsuccessful, while the even-numbered films were incredible hits. Star Trek: The Motion Picture, for example, was somewhat of a disappointment at the box office, but Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan is considered by many to be one of the best films in the series. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, while an emotionally intense adventure, is often viewed as a stopgap film that only serves to bring Spock (Leonard Nimoy) back from the dead. It was followed by Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, a popular comedy that was very successful financially. And so on.

However, the critics’ consensus easily breaks this pattern, at least when it comes to approval ratings on Rotten Tomatoes. The highest-rated film in the Star Trek franchise is an odd-numbered film. However, the approval rating of the No. 1 film is only slightly higher than that of an acclaimed even-numbered Star Trek film from the 1990s. Although the Star Trek series is best known for its sense of diplomacy and willingness to grapple with thorny, philosophical issues, the highest-rated films in the franchise are the most violent and action-packed.

With a 94% approval rating (based on 356 reviews), JJ Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek film is the best-reviewed of all the Star Trek films on RT. Some Trekkies may find this fact disappointing, as Abrams’ film represents a massive departure from the franchise. Rather than continuing with any existing Star Trek story, Abrams created an alternate timeline in which he could reintroduce Kirk, Spock, and all the others as younger, hotter, stormier versions of themselves. This was a high-octane Star Trek, full of fights and explosions and death and drama. It’s more like Star Wars than Star Trek. Many of the details of Abrams’ films – the ships, the personality traits of the characters – were merely derived from what a non-Trekkie might know about Star Trek through cultural osmosis; Abrams famously admitted that he knew little about Star Trek when he took on the project.

One could understand why Abrams’ film was such a success. A mass audience unfamiliar with Star Trek might enjoy a clean “reboot” now unthreatened by the decades of lore that existed before, while long-time Trekkies might watch out of morbid curiosity. A complete reboot of a major entertainment franchise is also a surefire way to generate a lot of ink in the entertainment press and ensure that Star Trek would be talked about a full year before its release.

It certainly didn’t hurt that dazzlingly attractive actors played the familiar Enterprise crew. Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, John Cho, Zoe Saldana, Anton Yelchin, Karl Urban and Simon Pegg starred, and most critics, even those who didn’t like the film, admitted that the casting was pretty spot on. The only major criticisms were that the plot was thin, sacrificed in favor of a fast pace and non-stop action.

With an approval rating of 93%, Jonathan Frakes’ 1996 actioner Star Trek: First Contact was the second highest-rated Star Trek film on RT. This film, like Abrams’, was violent and had the kind of plot you find in typical Hollywood action movies. In the film, a mindless species of cyborgs called the Borg travel back in time to the year 2063 to stop humanity from launching its first faster-than-light spacecraft and ushering in a utopian age of discovery. The characters, while not cut out for action—AT ALL—fire guns and make action-packed quips like never before. This film, mind you, is based on Star Trek: The Next Generation, a series that is even more thoughtful and diplomatic than the original.

However, the action was well received by the mass audience and First Contact was a huge success. The critics certainly liked the film. The only people complaining about First Contact are snooty old school Trekkies like me who complain about how different it is from the TV series.

Third highest, with an approval rating of 87%, is Nicholas Meyer’s acclaimed 1982 film Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. This film was slower and more thoughtful than the films above, but it’s definitely more action-packed than Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which was notoriously sluggish. It also featured a great Ricardo Montalban as the over-the-top titular villain, a character that’s hard to resist.

It was The Wrath of Khan that introduced the idea that Star Trek films needed a “supervillain,” and one driven by vengeance. This idea has hamstrung several Star Trek films and left their stories uninspired. Four Star Trek films in a row have revolved around vengeful supervillains: the 2009 film Nemesis, Star Trek Into Darkness, and Star Trek Beyond.

The lowest-rated Star Trek film is, as Trekkies might predict, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, which has a shockingly low approval rating of 23%. This film, as mentioned, was directed by William Shatner and feels sloppy and cobbled together. The special effects in The Final Frontier are terrible and the story is poorly written. However, it must be admitted that the central concept is a brilliant idea. In the film, the Enterprise is hijacked and taken to a place in the galaxy where God—the actual physical manifestation of God—lives. Star Trek has always been a humanist series, rejecting faith and religion in favor of science and reason. If Star Trek characters were to face an actual deity, it would create an interesting philosophical conflict.

With an approval rating of just 38%, 2002’s Star Trek: Nemesis is the second worst film in the franchise. That film attempted a “supervillain” story, forcing the crew of the Enterprise-E to face an embittered clone of Captain Picard (Patrick Stewart). The story is convoluted and uninteresting, and none of the cast looked like they wanted to be there. Additionally, Nemesis came out right after 9/11, and it seemed like the world was more interested in stories of destruction and vengeance; the diplomatic world of Star Trek couldn’t exist at the time. It’s no wonder Nemesis and the parallel television series Star Trek: Enterprise both failed.

And with a 48% approval rating, 1994’s Star Trek: Generations comes in third. The first film based on The Next Generation was too obsessed with “passing the torch from Captain Kirk to Captain Picard.” Never mind that Picard had already led seven successful seasons of The Next Generation and should have had his own story. It’s clunky, not very creative, and oddly boring.