Star Trek's Kelvin Timeline Movies, Ranked From Worst To Best

Captain's Log: It's been a decade since the Enterprise last touched down on theater screens by way of "Star Trek Beyond" in 2016. Justin Lin's time with the crew was the third in the era of movies that were labeled the Kelvin timeline, which set the original crew of everyone's favorite Starfleet vessel on a different path after the destruction of the U.S.S. Kelvin from a time-traveling enemy ship. This trilogy has earned a place in "Star Trek" history, even after initial concerns about who would be brave enough to sit in the captain's chair as James T. Kirk or to portray the pointy-eared Vulcan, Mr. Spock.

Excluding a few bumps here and there in this franchise reboot, the united effort of Lin and J.J. Abrams was certainly an entertaining one. So much so that even after all this time since the last film was released, fans are still hopeful that Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Simon Pegg, and company will get back to exploring strange new worlds. What is it about these Kelvin timeline movies has "Star Trek" fans wanting more, and which out of these three surprising sci-fi movies is the best of the bunch? Well, after running diagnostics and giving it all she's got, captain, we've ranked the Kelvin trilogy to see which comes out on top. Set a course and see if our ranking lines up with yours, below.

Sequels always have a lot to live up to, and yet some of the bests come from the "Star Trek" franchise. There's the Borg-infested "Star Trek First Contact" (which Patrick Stewart sees as the best from the "Next Generation" crew) and "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan," widely regarded as one of the greatest sequels ever. Unfortunately, being caught in the tractor beam of this 1982 film is where "Star Trek Into Darkness" suffers the most.

The Kelvin films already established a distinct timeline and sent characters along different paths, which makes it all the more frustrating that "Into Darkness" is so tied to the history of what came before. After reuniting us with a crew that interacts seamlessly just as they planned, J.J. Abrams throws them up against the super-cool and viper-like charm of Benedict Cumberbatch as the anything-but-mysterious villain, John Harrison. By the time the film hit theaters, Trekkies had bet their best Starfleet uniform that Harrison was Khan. 

While there's certainly plenty of spectacle and chemistry between this fresh-faced Enterprise crew, all of it is undercut by "Into Darkness" looking to an old story instead of making a new one of its own. Even Abrams himself confessed to regretting the decisions in keeping Cumberbatch's character a secret, and he's right. There's simply too much wrath.

Like any Enterprise crew, no matter how rough around the edges, they are still dedicated to getting the job done. "Star Trek Beyond" earns extra points because it almost didn't happen. After Abrams shifted focus to "Star Wars," the third "Star Trek" film went through a period of development hell, with creative forces coming and going until Justin Lin took over as director with a script co-written by Kelvin crew members, Simon Pegg and Doug Jung. The result was a fun third installment that felt more like a "Star Trek" episode than a big-screen film. This is said with respect, as "Beyond" is more about exploring and understanding alien worlds and their inhabitants, such as Jaylah (Sofia Boutella) and the villain, Krall, played by Idris Elba.

Ultimately, the film does everything right that "Into Darkness" got wrong. It's an enjoyable watch overall, with callbacks to the very version of the "Star Trek" franchise it's based on. Crew members branch out on their own and create compelling dynamics, all trying to confront a fascinating villain that isn't limited by lore. There's also an incredible set piece with the Enterprise and a second play of "Sabotage" from The Beastie Boys that's worth rewatching on its own. These are just some of the elements that make "Beyond" that good, and it makes us wish we could return to the Kelvin timeline, even after all this time.

According to Rotten Tomatoes, J.J. Abrams' initial run at "Star Trek" is the best film in the franchise, and while some might dispute the case, there's enough going for it to back up the argument. For one, there's the impressive collection of cast members who are daring to step into the sacred roles of the original "Star Trek" cast. Chris Pine has the charm of Captain Kirk, Zachary Quinto quickly proves himself as the logical choice for Spock, and Zoe Saldaña is an excellent choice as Uhura. That's even before we get to Karl Urban's dry-witted McCoy, John Cho swashbuckling his way in as Sulu, and the late Anton Yelchin being the endearing Pavel Chekov.

The true brilliance of Abrams' initial run at the Enterprise, however, lies in its careful handling of what preceded it and where this new era boldly went where no one had gone before. It silenced any skeptics who believed the original crew was being erased and instead took us down a completely different timeline. This shortcut allowed characters to die, planets to be destroyed, and introduced us to all of it through an exceptional opening action sequence featuring Chris Hemsworth as Captain Kirk's dad, with an enjoyable, though underused, villain in Eric Bana's Nero. This film isn't just a great "Star Trek" movie, it's a template for how franchise revivals can and should be done.