Christa Brown, a former Texas appellate attorney, is revered as perhaps the best-known of the brave women (and men) who blew the whistle on abusive clergy and coverups at churches in the powerful Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). She began her quest at age 51, by bravely sharing her own story of being repeatedly sexually abused as a teen by her youth pastor, Tommy Gilmore, the man she’d gone to for counseling at her church in Farmers Branch. She first came forward as a whistleblower in 2009.

“I think I was ahead of things. That was before #MeToo and #ChurchToo and all of that,” she says. While still running a busy Austin law practice, Brown for years collected and shared stories of others who sought help through the blog and website she set up, StopBaptistPredators.org, which compiled reports on hundreds of abusive clergy and created the first public database of convicted, admitted, and credibly accused Southern Baptist clergy sex abusers. 

Brown, now retired and living in Colorado, has continued to lift up other survivors and press for reforms. Her first book, This Little Light: Beyond a Baptist Preacher Predator and His Gang (Foremost Press, 2009), shares her journey from a frightened teen to an outspoken whistleblower. Her new memoir, Baptistland: A Memoir of Abuse, Betrayal and Transformation, out May 7, goes deeper. It is the confessional and sometimes excruciatingly intimate story of Brown’s life trapped in Baptistland, and her harrowing escape. 

Brown spoke with Texas Observer Investigations Editor Lise Olsen. Olsen first met Brown when she covered Southern Baptist abuse survivors as part of the Houston Chronicle/San Antonio Express-News team that produced an investigative series called “Abuse of Faith.”

TO: Why did you decide to write a painful memoir that delves so deep into troubling family secrets?

Christa Brown: For me it begins with the stories of so many other survivors that I have heard, and I can’t tell. But I hope that in telling my own story that other survivors see something that will resonate. This is one person’s memoir. But I think sometimes the stories of one person can shed light on history. And that’s part of why I wrote it. 

In so many conversations with other survivors, I have [heard] stories of familial estrangement after they speak out and come forward. And that is something many of us don’t talk about much because it is so painful. 

As a journalist, I heard stories of the secondary harm caused by the rejection of  a clergy abuse survivor’s friends, church members, and family. In your case, you share how you became estranged with all three of your sisters. 

Some survivors say that they felt as though they lost their entire community. They lost everything. I’ve heard that countless times.

You wrote at times you wanted to “slither out of your skin” as a teen survivor of sexual abuse. Why did you, many years later, put a tree of life tattoo both on your skin and on your book cover?

It is a very open and vulnerable and exposed book. And so the tattoo on my skin, and on the cover of the book is a way of showing that vulnerability. This is a story about a human body. It’s about embodiment, how we live. I think the cover reflects that. But I think mostly what that cover reflects [is how] I’m trying hard in this book to peel back these layers of truth, to reveal something. And that’s a very intimate portrait. The cover also reflects that intimacy.

I know you didn’t get that tattoo as a teen—as a Southern Baptist you couldn’t have. You’d have been in huge trouble. When did you get it?  

Many years later in my 50s, when I was dealing with cancer, actually multiple invasive cancers all at once. Intellectually, I know that cancer is a multifactorial process. But at the time, emotionally, I felt that experience as the culmination of all the horror of what I had been through in Baptistland. 

One of the things the surgeon said when I was diagnosed was: “Well, this appears to have been growing for six years.” and I counted back, I thought, this began when I was literally trying so hard to get people to do something about my perpetrator, get people in the Southern Baptist Convention to do something, and they threatened to sue me and all sorts of things. I wound up feeling that time was so stressful that my very cells were in rebellion. That’s how I experienced it emotionally. But I’m very healthy now, thankfully. 

In your case, your abuser often said “God Loves you Christa,” after assaulting you. Initially, he compared you to Mary, the virgin mother, and later to the devil, after he chose to blame you for his own sins. One startling insight comes when a college counselor later told you that you seemed to be suffering the way victims of incest do. Can you explain how being abused by a pastor might be as damaging to a child as being abused by a relative?

Being abused by a pastor, for someone who has been raised [and] indoctrinated in this faith group as I was, carries with it the idea that “This is what God wants. This God wants your life.”

I mean, that’s pretty all-encompassing. Sexual abuse when it is combined with abuse of faith, combines into something enormously powerful that just eviscerates all aspects of a person, physically, psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually, everything’s gone. Because if this is what God wants of you, what does that say about who you are? 

And family estrangement can be extreme for survivors of incest or of pastor abuse, right? 

It’s interesting in Baptist churches, we call the pastor “Brother Bob” and we talk about our church family. I think there are a lot of parallels to incest. 

One revelation in this book is that your abuser, Tommy Gilmore—despite being the subject of news reports, and a lawsuit that resulted in a formal apology from your church—continued to be employed in his Florida megachurch long after you spoke out. The Texas music minister, who knew Gilmore was abusing you and protected him, remained employed in churches too. Do you see these men as symbols of how the SBC continues to protect abusers and those who cover up?

Absolutely. The same thing is still happening today. After my first book, I thought that after everything I had been through. As painful as it was, I had succeeded in getting Tommy Gilmore, the perpetrator, out of ministry. It was only later that I realized he had only stepped away from being a staff minister, but he was still doing contract work as a children’s pastor. And since he wasn’t a staff minister, his photo and his name didn’t appear on any church website or staff registries.

And same thing with the music minister, who knew and covered it all up. His career went on. No one held against him the fact that he completely turned a blind eye to child sexual abuse. Both of their careers wholly prospered. There was never any consequence within the institution. Never any accountability. 

So often we see that abusive pastors target children from troubled homes—is that why you chose to be so transparent about the many problems in your own family? To help others see those patterns and hopefully act?

All children are vulnerable. I think it is the very nature of childhood. But I do also believe it’s true that some children are more vulnerable than others, and certainly those who come from troubled families have more vulnerability. I think they can be targeted more. That was certainly my story.

In this book, you explore generational trauma in your family. The revelations you share about your paternal grandmother being killed (in front of her children) and maternal grandmother being committed to a mental hospital are deeply disturbing. Did you learn those stories while researching this book? 

In part. I did grow up knowing that my maternal grandmother lived in an institution. But as a kid, I just didn’t think about it much—about how or why she had been committed. I learned more after my mother died. And I learned about my paternal grandmother’s violent death after the last of my father’s siblings died, when I had some communication from cousins.

In the process of writing the book, I began to put those pieces together, and reflect. Those things gave me enormous compassion for my parents, which doesn’t excuse anything that they did, but does help me see it with new eyes. I mean, when my dad was post-military, we didn’t even have the acronym PTSD. It just wasn’t on the radar for World War II veterans. And so, learning about those things really helped me understand them better.

I know you for your work as a whistleblower, which was critical to our Abuse of Faith investigation and the publication of a database of abusers. For a while, it seemed like SBC leaders would enact real reforms. Instead, as you write, it has turned out to be the “Do-Nothing Denomination.” Do you have any hope at all that the SBC will embrace change after it created a task force, launched a study and published its own formerly secret database?

No. That is something that has changed about me. Once upon a time, I did believe that if only I could show them the extent of this problem and the harm that was being done, surely they would reform. I do not believe that any longer. I certainly don’t think it will happen in my lifetime. I believe they will continue to do as little as possible for as long as possible.  

Because I think that for them, the priority is still managing the brand, managing the image, and protecting the institution. I guess protecting kids and congregants is way down on their list.

What we see in Baptistland is, at its root, a theology that is founded on oppression, hierarchy, and authoritarianism. It goes all the way back to the SBC’s roots as slaveholders.

SBC leaders seemed to push harder to expel women who were daring to preach instead of expelling abusers. That seemed to be one of their responses to the tremendous efforts made by survivors as part of the #ChurchToo #SBCToo movement. 

This is where they’re putting the focus: on expelling women preachers, and they don’t even have many because they’ve already run most of them off. 

Recently, we’ve seen efforts to promote the so-called “trad wife,” with women trying to make the lifestyle where they stay home and cater to their husbands look cool on social media. Why do you think it’s important for more women to escape Baptistland, even if they haven’t been sexually abused? 

What we see in Baptistland is, at its root, a theology that is founded on oppression, hierarchy, and authoritarianism. It goes all the way back to the SBC’s roots as slaveholders who protected the interests of other slaveholders. And it comes into the present day with the same sort of rationalizations and justifications for why men should have authority over women. 

They don’t want women to have leadership positions in the church. And they adhere to this notion that women should graciously submit to their husbands. It’s not enough to just submit. They want women to graciously submit. 

I think, any time you start from a foundation of believing that some people for no reason other than their gender should have authority over others, that necessarily lends itself to abuse. 

That’s what we have in the Southern Baptist Convention with their notion that men should have authority over women. And if you combine that foundation with a structure that is wholly lacking in effective systems for accountability, then it sets up a monster of a system in which there is no recourse. 

When you tell people that God wants you as women to be submissive to men, that’s an abusive concept. And I don’t think it does men any good either. It doesn’t do families any good. It sets up all sorts of false expectations and harmful expectations. It’s a patriarchy and an authoritarian system. 

You write this book as if each part of it was a death—in a way you are harkening back to the Christian metaphor of being born again. Have you truly escaped Baptistland?

I have certainly been born again multiple times because of these deaths that were imposed on me. 

I don’t think anyone ever escapes the indoctrination of our childhood. We take steps, big steps, little steps. And certainly I’ve done that, but Baptistland is a part of me. It’s where I was raised. It’s how I was raised. It’s the culture in which I was enmeshed. And I also think that when childhood sexual abuse is prolonged and repetitive, and mine went on for many months, I think that too is something that stays. Yes, we move forward and yes, we still have good lives, but it doesn’t go away. My abuse was a part of Baptistland. That’s still a part of me. 

Although I myself haven’t fully escaped Baptistland—and probably never will—my daughter knows no part of it. Baptistland is wholly unfamiliar and alien terrain for her. And that makes me very happy.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

America’s young people face a mental health crisis, and adults constantly debate how much to blame phones and social media. A new round of conversation has been spurred by Jonathan Haidt’s book “The Anxious Generation,” which contends that rising mental health issues in children and adolescents are the result of social media replacing key experiences during formative years of brain development.

The book has been criticized by academics, and rightfully so. Haidt’s argument is based largely on research showing that adolescent mental health has declined since 2010, coinciding roughly with mass adoption of the smartphone. But of course, correlation is not causation. The research we have to date suggests that the effects of phones and social media on adolescent mental health are probably much more nuanced.

That complex picture is less likely to get attention than Haidt’s claims because it doesn’t play as much into parental fears. After all, seeing kids absorbed in their phones, and hearing that their brains are being “rewired,” calls to mind an alien world-domination plot straight from a sci-fi film.

And that’s part of the problem with the “rewiring the brain” narrative of screen time. It reflects a larger trope in public discussion that wields brain science as a scare tactic without yielding much real insight.

First, let’s consider what the research has shown so far.

Meta-analyses of the links between mental health and social media give inconclusive or relatively minor results. The largest U.S. study on childhood brain development to date did not find significant relationships between the development of brain function and digital media use. This spring, an American Psychological Association health advisory reported that the current state of research shows “using social media is not inherently beneficial or harmful to young people” and that its effects depend on “pre-existing strengths or vulnerabilities, and the contexts in which they grow up.”

So why the insistence from Haidt and others that smartphones dangerously rewire the brain? It stems from misunderstandings of research that I have encountered frequently as a neuroscientist studying emotional development, behavioral addictions and people’s reactions to media.

Imaging studies in neuroscience typically compare some feature of the brain between two groups: one that does not do a specific behavior (or does it less frequently) and one that does the behavior more frequently. When we find a relationship, all it means is either that the behavior influences something about the functioning of this brain feature, or something about this feature influences whether we engage in the behavior.

In other words, an association between increased brain activity and using social media could mean that social media activates the identified pathways, or people who already have increased activity in those pathways tend to be drawn to social media, or both.

Fearmongering happens when the mere association between an activity such as social media use and a brain pathway is taken as a sign of something harmful on its own. Functional and structural research on the brain cannot give enough information to objectively identify increases or decreases in neural activity, or in a brain region’s thickness, as “good” or “bad.” There is no default healthy status quo that everybody’s brains are measured against, and doing nearly any activity involves many parts of the brain.

“The Anxious Generation” neglects these subtleties when, for example, it discusses a brain system known as the default mode network. This system decreases in activity when we engage with spirituality, meditation and related endeavors, and Haidt uses this fact to claim that social media is “not healthy for any of us” because studies suggest that it by contrast increases activity in the same network.

But the default mode network is just a set of brain regions that tend to be involved in internally focused thinking, such as contemplating your past or making a moral judgment, versus externally focused thinking such as playing chess or driving an unfamiliar route. Its increased activity does not automatically mean something unhealthy.

This type of brain-related scare tactic is not new. A common version, which is also deployed for smartphones, involves pathways in the brain linked to drug addiction, including areas that respond to dopamine and opioids. The trope says that any activity associated with such pathways is addictive, like drugs, whether it’s Oreos, cheese, God, credit card purchases, suntanning or looking at a pretty face. These things do involve neural pathways related to motivated behavior — but that does not mean they damage our brains or should be equated with drugs.

Adolescence is a time when the brain is particularly plastic, or prone to change. But change doesn’t have to be bad. We should take advantage of plasticity to help teach kids healthy ways to self-manage their own use of, and feelings surrounding, smartphones.

Do I expect future findings on the adolescent brain to immediately quell parents’ fears on this issue? Of course not — and the point is that they shouldn’t. Brain imaging data is a fascinating way to explore interactions between psychology, neuroscience and social factors. It’s just not a tool for declaring behaviors to be pathological.

Feel free to question whether social media is good for kids — but don’t misuse neuroscience to do so.

Anthony Vaccaro is a postdoctoral research associate at the University of Southern California’s Psychology department. He wrote this column for the Los Angeles Times.

Related Articles

Isaacs, Rosenbaum: America’s ‘big glass’ dominance hangs on the fate of two powerful new telescopes

Tyler Cowen: Trump’s plans for the Fed make no sense, even for him

Jill Gurvey: Post-Oct. 7, I’m finally questioning the narrative about Jewish inheritance

Bret Stephens: Sheryl Sandberg screams back at the silence

David French: Colleges have gone off the deep end. This is the way back.

More than 100 years ago, astronomer George Ellery Hale brought our two Pasadena institutions together to build what was then the largest optical telescope in the world. The Mount Wilson Observatory changed the conception of humankind’s place in the universe and revealed the mysteries of the heavens to generations of citizens and scientists alike. Ever since then, the United States has been at the forefront of “big glass.”

In fact, our institutions, Carnegie Science and Caltech, still help run some of the largest telescopes for visible-light astronomy ever built.

But that legacy is being threatened as the National Science Foundation, the federal agency that supports basic research in the U.S., considers whether to fund two giant telescope projects. What’s at stake is falling behind in astronomy and cosmology, potentially for half a century, and surrendering the scientific and technological agenda to Europe and China.

In 2021, the National Academy of Sciences released Astro2020. This report, a road map of national priorities, recommended funding the $2.5 billion Giant Magellan Telescope at the peak of Cerro Las Campanas in Chile and the $3.9 billion Thirty Meter Telescope at Mauna Kea in Hawaii. According to those plans, the telescopes would be up and running sometime in the 2030s.

NASA and the Department of Energy backed the plan. Still, the National Science Foundation’s governing board on Feb. 27 said it should limit its contribution to $1.6 billion, enough to move ahead with just one telescope. The NSF intends to present their process for making a final decision in early May, when it will also ask for an update on nongovernmental funding for the two telescopes. The ultimate arbiter is Congress, which sets the agency’s budget.

America has learned the hard way that falling behind in science and technology can be costly.

Beginning in the 1970s, the U.S. ceded its powerful manufacturing base, once the nation’s pride, to Asia. Fast forward to 2022, the U.S. government marshaled a genuine effort toward rebuilding and restarting its factories — for advanced manufacturing, clean energy and more — with the Inflation Reduction Act, which is expected to cost more than $1 trillion.

President Joe Biden also signed into law the $280 billion CHIPS and Science Act two years ago to revive domestic research and manufacturing of semiconductors — which the U.S. used to dominate — and narrow the gap with China.

As of 2024, America is the unquestioned leader in astronomy, building powerful telescopes and making significant discoveries. A failure to step up now would cede our dominance in ways that would be difficult to remedy.

The National Science Foundation’s decision will be highly consequential. Europe, which is on the cusp of overtaking the U.S. in astronomy, is building the aptly named Extremely Large Telescope, and the United States hasn’t been invited to partner in the project. Russia aims to create a new space station and link up with China to build an automated nuclear reactor on the moon.

Although we welcome any sizable grant for new telescope projects, it’s crucial to understand that allocating funds sufficient for just one of the two planned telescopes won’t suffice. The Giant Magellan and the Thirty Meter telescopes are designed to work together to create capabilities far greater than the sum of their parts. They are complementary ground stations. The GMT would have an expansive view of the southern hemisphere heavens, and the TMT would do the same for the northern hemisphere.

The goal is “all-sky” observation, a wide-angle view into deep space. Europe’s Extremely Large Telescope won’t have that capability. Besides boosting America’s competitive edge in astronomy, the powerful dual telescopes, with full coverage of both hemispheres, would allow researchers to gain a better understanding of phenomena that come and go quickly, such as colliding black holes and the massive stellar explosions known as supernovas. They would put us on a path to explore Earth-like planets orbiting other suns and address the question: “Are we alone?”

Funding both the GMT and TMT is an investment in basic science research, the kind of fundamental work that typically has led to economic growth and innovation in our uniquely American ecosystem of scientists, investors and entrepreneurs.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX is the most recent example, but the synergy goes back decades. Basic science at the vaunted Bell Labs, in part supported by taxpayer contributions, was responsible for the transistor, the discovery of cosmic microwave background and establishing the basis of modern quantum computing. The internet, in large part, started as a military communications project during the Cold War.

Beyond its economic ripple effect, basic research in space and about the cosmos has played an outsized role in the imagination of Americans. In the 1960s, Dutch-born American astronomer Maarten Schmidt was the first scientist to identify a quasar, a star-like object that emits radio waves, a discovery that supported a new understanding of the creation of the universe: the Big Bang. The first picture of a black hole, seen with the Event Horizon Telescope, was front-page news in 2019.

We understand that competing in astronomy has only gotten more expensive, and there’s a need to concentrate on a limited number of critical projects. But what could get lost in the shuffle are the kind of ambitious projects that have made America the scientific envy of the world, inspiring new generations of researchers and attracting the best minds in math and science to our colleges and universities.

Do we really want to pay that price?

Eric D. Isaacs is the president of Carnegie Science, prime backer of the Giant Magellan Telescope. Thomas F. Rosenbaum is president of Caltech, key developer of the Thirty Meter Telescope. They wrote this column for the Los Angeles Times.

Related Articles

Tyler Cowen: Trump’s plans for the Fed make no sense, even for him

Jill Gurvey: Post-Oct. 7, I’m finally questioning the narrative about Jewish inheritance

Bret Stephens: Sheryl Sandberg screams back at the silence

David French: Colleges have gone off the deep end. This is the way back.

Stephen L. Carter: Will Columbia protesters achieve their goals?

The summer movie season is upon us.

Bring on Batman! Bring on Spider-Man! Bring on Darth Vader!

Wait, what’s that? No Spidey? No Bats? No visit to a galaxy far, far away?

Come to think of it, Godzilla and Kong have already smashed into theaters, and those shape-shifting robots won’t return until the fall with the animated “Transformers One.”

What in the “Jurassic World” is going on here? (Yeah, no dinosaurs, either.)

Oh, don’t worry, we’re still looking at a summer of sequels (“Inside Out 2”), prequels (“A Quiet Place: Day One”) reboots (“Alien: Romulus”) and heroic — and violent — men in ridiculous costumes (“Deadpool & Wolverine”). But we may just get an original story or three, too.

Here’s a look at some of what’s coming to theaters and streaming services in the warmer months:

Ryan Gosling, left, and Emily Blunt in “The Fall Guy.” (Universal Pictures/TNS)

“The Fall Guy” | May 3 | Theaters: Look for “Barbie” star Ryan Gosling to bring some leftover Kenergy to this action romp, based on the TV show that saw Lee Majors as Colt Seavers, a stuntman who worked on the side as a bounty hunter. Now Gosling is Colt, a stuntman not far removed from a career-threatening accident who’s pulled into the case of a missing movie star. Emily Blunt,” who was a key player in Academy Award-winner “Oppenheimer” — the other half of the “Barbenheimer” craze — co-stars as a first-time movie director … and Colt’s ex-girlfriend. The cast also boasts Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who’s heavily rumored to be the next James Bond. Last but not least, “The Fall Guy” is helmed by David Leitch (“Bullet Train,” “Deadpool 2,” “Atomic Blonde”), who knows a bit about being a stuntman, as he was one, and about making movies that successfully blend action and comedy.

“The Idea of You” | May 3 | Prime Video: Michael Showalter, whose directorial credits include winners “The Big Sick” (2017) and “The Lovebirds” (2020), is at the helm for this romance about a 40-something single mother (Anne Hathaway) and a 20-something member of a boy band (Nicholas Galitzine). Showalter and co-writer Jennifer Westfeldt (“Kissing Jessica Stein”) adapted the book of the same name by Robinne Lee.

“Prom Dates” | May 3 | Hulu: Julia Lester and Antonioa Gentry star as best Defriends looking to have an epic senior prom — a goal in jeopardy when each breaks up with her date shortly before the big dance in this coming-of-age comedy directed by Kim O. Nguyen (“Never Have I Ever”).

“Tarot” | May 3 | Theaters: Your future looks bleak — that is if you’re a character in this scary movie in which members of a group of college friends start dying after having a tarot card reading. The cast is led by Harriet Slater (“Pennyworth”).

“Unfrosted” | May 3 | Netflix: Well, THIS is not nothing. Jerry Seinfeld makes his directorial debut, stars in and co-wrote this romp about warring cereal companies in the early 1960s. The crispy-and-sweet cast also boasts Melisssa McCarthy, Hugh Grant, Amy Schumer, Jim Gaffigan, Peter Dinklage, James Marsen, Christian Slater and Bill Burr, among others.

“Mother of the Bride” | May 9 | Netflix: The father-of-the-bride formula has produced a number of movies over the years, and Netflix will try to flip the script a bit with Brooke Shields as the mother and Miranda Cosgrove (“iCarly) as the bride to be in this comedy directed by Mark Waters (“Freaky Friday,” 2004’s “Mean Girls”). (His previous effort was the gender-flipping “He’s All That” in 2021, so this really should be comfortable territory for him.)

“Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes” | May 10 | Theaters: After a trilogy of solid movies in the “Planet of the Apes” reboot series, we jump ahead a few generations with this fourth entry. Apes are living in harmony as the planet’s dominant species, with humans relegated to the shadows. The apes are now ruled by the ambitious Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand), who’s searching for valuable human technology. Meanwhile, a young chimp, Noa (Owen Teague), befriends a feral young female, Mae (Freya Allan), aka “Nova,” and the two go on a dangerous journey. Wes Ball (“The Maze Runner” trilogy) directs from a screenplay by Josh Friedman (“Foundation”).

“Back to Black” | May 17 | Theaters: Taken from the world tragically early — at age 27, like a few other forces in the world of music — British singer-songwriter Amy Winehouse gets the biopic treatment with this film named after her hugely successful and critically acclaimed 2006 album. Marissa Abela (“Industry”) portrays Winehouse in the film helmed by “Fifty Shades of Grey” director Sam Taylor-Johnson, the wife of Aaron Taylor-Johnson.

“IF” | May 17 | Theaters: After directing two highly entertaining “A Quiet Place” movies, John Krasinski trades vicious aliens for something kinder and gentler: imaginary friends. While Krasinski is in the cast, Ryan Reynolds stars opposite young Cailey Fleming, whose Bea can see other kids’ imaginary friends, who need her help. Providing voice-work for said creative creatures include Steve Carell, Krasinski’s old buddy from “The Office,” along with the director’s wife, Emily Blunt, and other heavy hitters including Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Matt Damon, Sam Rockwell, Maya Rudolph and the late Louis Gossett Jr.

“The Strangers: Chapter 1” | May 17 | Theaters: If we’re following, this is the first part of a horror trilogy, with all installments helmed by Renny Harlin (“Die Hard 2”), that will serve as a trilogy to 2008’s “The Strangers” and its 2018 sequel, “The Strangers: Prey at Night,” both of which were at least co-written by Bryan Bertino. The latter is credited with the story for this new scare fest, in which a young couple (Madelaine Petsch and Froy Gutierrez) who, after car troubles, spend the night in an eerie town — specifically in a remote cabin — and, of course, are terrorized by some masked folks. If you’re not frightened half to death after this first new flick, fear not: The subsequent chapters both are expected to hit theaters in 2024.

“Thelma the Unicorn” | May 17 | Netflix: Musical artist Brittany Howard voices the titular creature in this animated adaptation of the children’s book series by Aaron Blabey. The voice cast also includes Will Forte and Zach Galifianakis.

“The Blue Angels” | May 23 | Prime Video: After this documentary spends a week in IMAX theaters — and, honestly, that’s surely the best way to experience it — it will soar into living rooms via Amazon’s streaming platform. Says a news release about this look at the U.S. Navy’s flight demonstration squadron and frequent air show headliner, “The immersive footage puts you in the cockpit for a firsthand view of the Blue Angels’ precision flying, while the aerial shots deliver a spectacular showcase of the breathtaking maneuvers that have made them the world’s premier jet team.” (Note to self: Make time to see this in IMAX.)

“Atlas” | May 24 | Netflix: In the latest from “San Andreas” and “Rampage” director Brad Peyton, Jennifer Lopez is Atlas Shepherd, a heroine out to stop a problematic artificial intelligence. The cast also features Simu Liu, Sterling K. Brown and Mark Strong.

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” rides into theaters on May 24. (Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures/TNS)

“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” | May 24 | Theaters: Are you ready to venture back into the sensory-overload post-apocalyptic environment writer-director George Miller gave the world in 2015 with “Mad Max: Fury Road.” This prequel/spinoff — the fifth installment in Miller’s “Mad Max” franchise — sees the talented Anya Taylor-Joy portraying a younger version of the titular character, portrayed memorably in “Fury Road” by Charlize Theron. Taylor-Joy’s Imperator Furiosa will butt heads — violently, we presume — with Chris Hemsworth’s Warlord Dementus in a film sure to deliver wild sights along with sound and overall fury.

“The Garfield Movie” | May 24 | Theaters: Chris Pratt voices our favorite lasagna-loving cat in this animated romp directed by Mark Dindal (“Chicken Little”).

“Summer Camp” | May 31 | Theaters: Three women whose friendship dates way back to summer school, played by Diane Keaton, Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard, look to recapture the old magic at a camp reunion in this comedy, which also features Eugene Levy.

“Bad Boys: Ride or Die” | June 7 | Theaters: Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are back as brave-and-brash cops for a fourth installment in this action-comedy franchise, and the directing tandem of Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah, aka Adil El Arbi, returns after helming the previous installment, 2020’s “Bad Boys for Life.”

“The Crow” | June 7 | Theaters: In this reboot of the story of the resurrected and avenging Eric Draven, aka The Crow, Bill Skarsgård takes over the titular role, first made famous by the late Brandon Lee in the 1994 film of the same name. Like that movie and those that followed, this new effort is based on the comic book series by James O’Barr. Rupert Sanders (“Snow White and the Huntsman”) directs.

“Hit Man” | June 7 | Netflix: In select theaters on May 24, the latest from director Richard Linklater (“Before Sunset,” “Boyhood”) sees Glen Powell (“Anyone but You”) doing his charming thing as a cop who regularly poses as a hit man — that is, as Powell’s Gary Johnson says, things get “complicated.” That’s when Adria Arjona’s Maddy Masters enters his life. Co-written by Linklater and Powell, this action-romance-comedy is based on a true story.

A teen’s inner emotions are introduced to a new one, Anxiety, in “Inside Out 2.” (Courtesy of Pixar Animation Studios/TNS)

“Inside Out 2” | June 14 | Theaters: Riley, the young girl from 2015 Pixar Animation Studios hit “Inside Out,” is now a teen, which means (gasp!) new emotions. Returning emotions Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith) and Anger (Lewis Black) are joined by newcomers Envy (Ayo Edibiri), Ennui (Adèle Exarchopoulos), Embarrassment (Paul Walter Hauser) and, perhaps most importantly, Anxiety (Maya Hawke). Other newcomers include Tony Hale and Liza Lapira, taking over the roles of Fear and Disgust, respectively. And Riely is now voiced by Kensington Tallman, while Diane Lane and Kyle MacLachlan return to voice her parents. All this internal emotional havoc will be orchestrated by Kelsey Mann, making his feature-directing debut, and Meg LaFauve, who wrote the screenplay after serving as a co-writer on “Inside Out,” which won the Academy Award for best animated feature in 2016.

“The Watchers” | June 14 | Theaters: Ishana Night Shyamalan, daughter of filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan, would seem to be a chip of the ol’ creepy filmmaking block — at least if the recently released trailer for this horror entry is any indication. Starring Dakota Fanning as a woman who becomes trapped in a mysterious forest, it is an adaptation of the novel of the same name by A. M. Shine.

“Kinds of Kindness” | June 21 | Theaters: It was really decent of filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos and actor Emma Stone not to keep us waiting for another collaboration after last year giving the world the cinematic treasure that is “Poor Things.” Among those joining the Academy Award-winner Stone on screen for this three-story affair will be Jesse Plemons and her “Poor Things” co-star Willem Dafoe.

“A Quiet Place: Day One” | June 28 | Theaters: It’s still, well, pretty quiet when it comes to details regarding this prequel to writer-director John Krasinski’s “A Quiet Place” (2018) and “A Quiet Place Part II” (2020). We know that a key player from the latter, Djimon Hounsou, is back, and he’s joined by actors Lupita Nyong’o, Joseph Quinn and Alex Wolff for this tale. It’s safe to say the movie — written and directed by Michael Sarnoski (“Pig”), who collaborated on the story with Krasinski — will take us back to the day of the invasion by ferocious aliens who don’t see so well but can attack upon hearing the slightest sound.

“Daddio” | June 28 | Theaters: Dakota Johnson plays a woman who gets into deep conversations with her cab driver (Sean Penn) in this drama.

“Horizon: An American Saga (Part One)” and “Horizon: An American Saga (Part Two)” | June 28 and Aug. 16 | Theaters: Directing for the first time since 2003’s “Open Range,” Kevin Costner also co-wrote and stars in this Western tale he’s been trying to bring to the big screen for just over a quarter of a century. The now former “Yellowstone” star has said he plans to make a four-part saga, but at least we’re getting these first two parts of “Saga” close together on the calendar. Telling a fictional story set before the Civil War about the expansion of the American West, “Horizon” also boasts cast members Sam Worthington, Sienna Miller, Giovanni Ribisi and many others.

“Despicable Me 4” | July 3 | Theaters: Our villain-turned-hero Gru (voiced as always by Steve Carell) would seem to have his hands full in the latest entry in this enduring animated franchise. His family keeps growing — in addition to wife Lucy (Kristen Wiig) and three adopted daughters, there’s now the trouble-making Gru Jr. — and characters voiced by Will Ferrell, Sofia Vergara and Joey King are out to get him. Back at the helm is Chris Remaud, who directed 2010’s “Despicable Me” and 2013’s “Despicable Me 2” has been known to give voice to one of those little yellow minions now and again.

“Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F” | July 5 | Netflix: Eddie Murphy reprises one of his most believed characters, street-smart, wise-cracking police officer Axel Foley, in this fourth “Beverly Hills Cop” installment. Judge Reinhold and John Ashton are back, too, as California cops Billy Rosewood and John Taggart, respectively, but Axel — who’s out to uncover a conspiracy after his daughter (Taylour Paige) is threatened — has a new partner played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

“Fly Me to the Moon” | July 12 | Theaters: Romantic sparks fly between characters played by Scarlett Johansson and Channing Tatum in this comedy-drama set during the space race of the 1960s. Greg Berlanti (“Love, Simon”) directs.

“Touch” | July 12 | Theaters: Egill Olafsson stars in this tale of a man’s emotional journey to find a long-lost love before his own time runs out. Baltasar Kormákur (“Everest”) directs and co-wrote the screenplay.

“Deadpool & Wolverine” | July 26 | Theaters: The stakes appear to be of the universe-altering variety in this long-awaited third “Deadpool” entry, with Ryan Reynolds’ titular antihero going so far as to team up with old nemesis Wolverine — being played for the umpteenth time by Hugh Jackman — to try to save the day. Shawn Levy takes over directing duties after working with Reynolds on 2021’s “Free Guy” and 2022’s “The Adam Project,” but, despite those family-friendly titles and Deadpool now being controlled by Disney-owned Marvel Studios, “Deadpool & Wolverine” appears to have all the colorful language and over-the-top action we’ve come to expect from the franchise. Morena Baccarin returns as Vanessa, and newcomer Emma Corrin portrays the powerful mutant Cassandra Nova in this story, the co-writers of which include Reynolds and Levy.

“Didi” | July 26 | Theaters: This coming-of-age story about a 13-year-old Taiwanese American boy (Izaac Wang) — a semi-autobiographical film from writer-director Sean Wang — made some noise at the Sundance Film Festival in January.

“Harold and the Purple Crayon” | Aug. 2 | Theaters: Positioned as a sequel to the 1955 children’s book of the same name by Crocket Johnson, this live action-meets-animation fantasy stars Zachary Levi — as a now-grown Harold, long the holder of a magical purple crayon — Lil Rel Howery, Benjamin Bottani, Zooey Deschanel, Alfred Molina and others. Carlos Saldanha (“Ferdinand”) directs.

“My Old Ass” | Aug. 2 | Theaters: We’re comfortable assuming the title of this comedy from writer-director Megan Park (“The Fallout”) — in which a girl (Maisy Stella) is warned by her future self (Aubrey Plaza) not to fall in love — tells us a lot about the tone we can expect.

“Borderlands” | Aug. 9 | Theaters: The television world has produced a couple of excellent video game adaptations of late in “The Last of Us” and “Fallout,” and the movies get another shot with this slice of irreverent sci-fi-action-comedy from director Eli Roth (“Hostel”). The ensemble cast is led by the unusual but appealing tandem of Cate Blanchett and Kevin Hart.

“It Ends with Us” | Aug. 9 | Theaters: Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni (“Jane the Virgin”) and Brandon Sklenar star in an adaptation of the romance novel of the same name by Colleen Hoover. Baldoni, whose directorial credits include 2020’s “Clouds,” also is at the helm of this one.

“Trap” | Aug. 9 | Theaters: The internet — or, more accurately, some people on the internet — suspect this next film from M. Night Shyamalan is another fitting within the universe that began with his twisty 2000 hit “Unbreakable.” Regardless, we mostly like what the director has been putting out into the world in recent years, so we’re looking forward to this original tale of a dad (Josh Hartnett) who, while talking his daughter to a big concert, realizes he’s suspected by authorities of being the serial killer knowns as “The Butcher.”

“Alien: Romulus” | Aug. 16 | Theaters: With 2016’s “Don’t Breathe,” director Federico Alvarez showed he knows how to build tension — a prerequisite for helming a film in the long-running “Alien” franchise. This entry is said to be set between the two most-loved movies in the series, the saga-launching “Alien” (1979) and its 1986 sequel, “Aliens” — directed, respectively, by Ridley Scott and James Cameron. It doesn’t sound like the most original of setups — a group of space colonists scavenging an old space station and running afoul of one of those teeth-forward monsters — but we’ll see. (In space, no one can hear you complain about a movie that feels a bit too much like what’s come before it.) By the way, Scott, who was at the helm of 2017’s “Alien: Covenant,” is counted among the film’s producers.

“Blink Twice” | Aug. 23 | Theaters: Zoe Kravitz makes her directorial debut in this black comedy thriller starring Naomi Ackie (“The End of the F***ing World”) and Channing Tatum as a waitress and the tech mogul who invites her to an island where, you guessed it, some crazy things go down. The cast also boasts Christian Slater, Haley Joel Osment and Alia Shawkat, and the whole thing looks like a lot of twisted fun.

Related Articles

Norwegian group will host Syttende Mai celebration in Stillwater

What to stream: Crank up the adrenaline with these stunt-filled action films

It’s the last Free Comic Book Day at the place where it was created

Tech review: Tech gifts for your graduate

Is Minnesota high school junior FHK on his way to YouTube French fry stardom?