Across 41 years and 70-some films, Juliette Binoche — the gold standard for cinematic expressivity, and for performances both imposing and delicately shaded — has figured out a few things.

One: “Do your own work. Because you cannot rely on directors.”

Two: Her favorite screen actor is the late Philip Seymour Hoffman, and they once spent four hours over dinner discussing “oh, everything. Life.”

Three: She does not like to be told to hold back, even — perhaps especially — by filmmakers she admires. Binoche’s latest film, the visually droolworthy period picture “The Taste of Things,” was written and directed by the Vietnamese French writer-director Trân Anh Hùng, whose works include “The Scent of Green Papaya,” a similarly delectable number.

“A couple of times,” Binoche recalls, “he came to me after a take and said, ‘Juliette, can you be more … neutral this time?’ And I said, ‘What do you mean, neutral?’” She speaks these words with just a hint of judgment, in a tone of what can only be described as withering neutrality.

In “The Taste of Things,” which was chosen as the French entry for the category of international feature film at the upcoming Academy Awards, Binoche, 59, plays the cook Eugénie, the longtime culinary and sometime romantic partner of a renowned chef. They have retired to the country together. The story, based on the 1920 novel translated into English as “The Passionate Epicure,” begins in 1885, with Eugénie in subtly declining health, and the chef Dodin mounting a new stealth campaign of marriage proposal. Dodin is played by Benoît Magimel.

The film marked the first time Binoche and Magimel worked together since “Children of the Century” in 1999. Their off-screen partnership of the time, which lasted several years, produced a daughter, Hana. “I think it’s so sad when people separating don’t see each other anymore,” Binoche says, over a large, grazing sort of lunch at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills (filet mignon, polenta, grilled broccolini, et al.) “They don’t express what they’re feeling. It’s terrible. It’s burying yourself before you die.”

The following is edited for clarity and length.

Q: You filmed “The Taste of Things” in the spring of 2022. Does it feel like a long time ago?

A: “You know, not really. With a film that was quite intense to make, time works differently. The experience is still printed in you. Still very vivid, what we went through, because you had to be so present in every moment. So it stays in you. It’s not just passing through; it’s digging in.

I’d seen most of Trân’s earlier films, including “Eternity,” and I thought in “Eternity” he retreated from emotion a little bit. With “The Taste of Things” I wanted to give him as much emotion as I felt was needed. A couple of times after a take he came to me and said, “Juliette, can you be more neutral?” And I said “what do you mean, neutral? I am a human being, I have to feel, I have to live! I cannot block myself to please you intellectually.” So. I think I was smart at that moment. (smiles) I asked Trân afterward why he asked me in that scene to be neutral. He said he was afraid there would be too much emotion. But after I said “no, I can’t do that,” we shot another take and he gave me a little pat and said, “You know what? That’s fine” (laughs).

Q: I rarely get a single emotion in any of your work on screen, whoever you’re playing.

A: I think that’s preferable, yes? It’s important to understand the root of everything, and somehow link it to the surface of what you’re doing and who you’re playing. That’s why comedies are so difficult. I hate comedies, usually, because so often it’s about overstatement, and it doesn’t work for me.

As human beings, we carry everything with us, all the time, and it’s all being revealed while you’re shooting. That is the magic of it. You cannot push or will it into being a certain way. It needs to come out before the camera in a way you didn’t expect.

Q: Can you remember the first time you saw a film as a child where a performer just basically changed your life forever?

A: Yes. I was six or seven, and I saw Charlie Chaplin’s short films. And then I happened to visit Charlie Chaplin in Switzerland with my sister, for real, when I was nine. My father was a friend of one of his daughters, Victoria.

Q: So if the first person you saw on screen was Buster Keaton instead, I wonder if years later you would’ve told your “Taste of Things” director, yes, fine, neutral is fine?

A: Who knows? (Laughs). We all have to be transparent as actors. To let things come out. That’s not neutral. It’s a sort of an abnegation. You give into something and let something happen so it comes out of you naturally.

Q: The kitchen in “The Taste of Things,” with the wood fire and the beautiful copper pots, it’s like a dream kitchen, designed to make 21st century audiences want to go to late 19th century provincial France immediately.

A: I know! I bought a farm a year and a half ago, two kilometers from my grandmother’s house, in Saint-Martin-de-Seignanx (near the Spanish border). I had some difficult memories there, my parents separating, sometimes a little rough. But it will be good for all of us, cousins and everyone, to gather there. It’s good to have a place for family. And my goal, when the farmhouse is finished, is a sort of “Taste of Things” kitchen.

Q: The first scene, or scenes, of meal preparation we see in the film — it lasts nearly 40 minutes, and it’s a swirl of activity, none of it ostentatious, from the picking of the vegetables at sunrise to the emptying-out of a fish for an omelet. By the way, what kind of fish did you stick your hands into in that scene?

A: Turbot. Also turbot in English, I think. Wait, I’ll tell you. (Checks French to English translation on phone). Flounder? You don’t say “turbot” in English?

Q: I’m afraid I’m not the one to ask! But “flounder” I know, which doesn’t sound nearly as good. What are you actually frying up in the pan in that scene?

A: The testicles! That was the first day, my first scene, we filmed. We had three fishes we could use if we needed to. I was nervous! I had never done that. But it was fine, we did it in the first take. The testicles were for the omelet. (Pause) I didn’t try it.

Q: Can we talk a bit about you working with Benoît in the film?

A: Yes, certainly. We had seen each other once in a while (years after they split up), because we have a daughter together. But we never had a real conversation about the past, things that happened. And then suddenly we were spending time, working together. I was very moved by this. And I think he was as well.

I think distance creates the need for expressing feelings. And so I used Trân’s words (in the “Taste of Things” screenplay) to express my feelings for Benoît. The medium became a sort of gift, a bridge toward him, and I was able to tell him everything: I love you no matter what happened, I care for you, life goes on, we have a wonderful child, I loved you then, and now I love you in a different way. And that’s the way it is.

For our daughter, it was like opening a door. She doesn’t remember us being together, so this was a sort of healing moment, seeing her parents expressing things between them.

Q: How would you characterize Benoît’s approach to acting in relation to your own?

A: He loves the freedom the earpiece gives him. Giving him the lines. He loves it. For the shorter scenes, he didn’t need it. For the monologues, he used it. I adapted to his needs and it didn’t bother me. We both like going on an adventure to see what happens in a retake. I feel like it’s a privilege to do another take of a scene. You have to be an open instrument. Not thinking too much. Just jumping into the unknown.

Q: Did it take time to find that freedom, when you were younger?

A: I had my mother as a theater teacher, who taught me. After that I went to my area drama conservatory, and then to a private school. And there, my teacher, she sort of shook me awake. She stopped me from wanting to act like I was trying to be a great actress every time I opened my mouth. When I was 18 I was trying to prove it, and she would say “Stop!” because it was too “acted.” So then I started feeling something else. Being, not acting. But when I started in films, right afterward, I saw right away that (Jean-Luc) Godard (who cast Binoche in the controversial 1985 film “Hail Mary”) didn’t give a (fig) about me. Or care about trying to help me. He was just trying to figure out what to do with the camera.

And I thought: OK, I’m learning something here. Never rely on directors!

“The Taste of Things” opens in Chicago Feb. 9.

Michael Phillips is a Tribune critic.

mjphillips@chicagotribune.com

Twitter @phillipstribune

©2024 Chicago Tribune. Visit chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

“You can’t be walking around at night, on a white street, and not expect trouble.” Author Isabel Wilkerson’s mother has likely said something like this before, in one of any number of tragic contexts. In this case, George Zimmerman has recently killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin for walking, in a hoodie, at night, while Black. And Wilkerson wonders: Is it really on the young man’s shoulders to avoid arousing suspicion, then deadly overreaction, among his fellow American citizens?

Martin’s name is one of many heard in the vital, supple new film “Origin,” and screenwriter-director Ava DuVernay has found a way to turn an adaptation-defying bestseller — Isabel Wilkerson’s magnificent “Caste” — into what feels like the only possible film version.

Without sacrificing or exploiting any of Wilkerson’s personal story, “Origin” honors what the author and journalist did in taking on a hugely ambitious research project in the service of her second book. Subtitled “The Origins of Our Discontents,” “Caste” came out in 2020. It wasn’t easy to write, but it reads like a streak — a provocative and elegantly intertwined examination of America’s racial history and structural biases, and their undeniable links to both India’s caste system and Nazi Germany’s murder of 6 million Jews.

The result, on screen, is not like any other how-I-wrote-this biopic, partly because it’s much more than that. DuVernay dramatizes the historical figures in Wilkerson’s “Caste,” through her travels abroad and her family joys and sorrows at home, in constantly surprising ways.

It begins where too many American stories begin: with one more dead Black body on a residential street. The 2012 killing of Martin serves as the sobering prologue to “Origin.” The news story strikes Wilkerson (played with supple authority and great, compressed force by Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor) as worth writing about, though she resists the entreaties of a friend and former New York Times editor (played by Blair Underwood).

Soon enough, grief sends Wilkerson, the former Chicago bureau chief of the New York Times, into a heartbreaking new realm of purpose. Wilkerson’s second husband (Jon Bernthal, excellent) dies suddenly, a 15-year-old brain tumor diagnosis cruelly catching up with him. Wilkerson soon suffers another family loss and must pick up pieces everywhere she turns.

Those include the pieces, the notions, for researching an ever-larger idea for a book: one dealing, somehow, with America’s own racial caste structure and its connections to Nazi Germany’s caste society, as well as India’s. With the death of her mother (played with wonderful grace by Emily Yancy) in due course, Wilkerson focuses on work, as best she can, while seeking solace in friends, friends/interview subjects and colleagues around the world, some more supportive of her central thesis than others.

“Origin” struggles a bit to accommodate both DuVernay’s dramatized research, in the form of flashbacks, focused on 1930s Germany, and the Dalit caste of India — the lowest rung, the ones tasked with cleaning latrine waste with their bare hands. But like the book, the film about the making of the book pulls off a near-miracle in shaping a steadily multiplying amount of information and ideas that are not simply information and ideas. Reason: The people come alive in “Origin” and Ellis-Taylor holds the key.

I’d see it again for any number of scenes, notably Audra McDonald as a friend of Wilkerson’s, relaying the riveting story of why her father named her Miss Hale. DuVernay, whose previous work includes first-rate documentaries (“The 13th”), docudramas (“When They See Us”) and biographical portraits of a person and a movement (“Selma”), creates a singular visual leitmotif, in which we see Wilkerson, in a black void, leaves falling all around, communing with her late husband, or with a research subject who dies before she has a chance to hear his own story of racial caste prejudice involving a whites-only swimming pool and a Little League team that didn’t bother with caste and racial designations.

To say “Origin” is destined for countless classroom screenings risks making it sound medicinal or earnestly educational. It is, I suppose, educational; it’s also vibrant and adroit and searching as human drama. It’s one woman’s story. And like the book that inspired it, DuVernay’s adaptation makes us see what Wilkerson saw, all around the world we make for ourselves. And then remake. Or else.

———

‘ORIGIN’

3.5 stars (out of 4)

MPA rating: PG-13 (for thematic material involving racism, violence, some disturbing images, language and smoking)

Running time: 2:21

How to watch: In theaters

©2024 Chicago Tribune. Visit chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Let’s focus on lettuce and micro-greens for this easy primer.

Why, what, how and where

Neon flash for any person who believes their plant-growing skills are lacking or non-existent: Growing lettuce and micro-greens at home will prove that you’re not only capable and successful but it also could launch a whole new you, giving you a true green thumb.

Home-grown lettuce is almost as different from store-bought in taste as home-grown tomatoes are. Try seeding and growing lettuce at home, not just for the delicious taste and texture, but also for the convenience of adding a side salad to any meal. Plus, it is always a nice touch to have lettuce to complete a sandwich when you’re having soup on a cold winter night while perusing a new garden catalog.

Giving credit where due, commercial and small growers have come a long way in improving lettuce varieties and taste; even the packaging has gotten better if you’ve tried it from a box. Container lettuce is worth buying a time or two, just to hold on to and re-use the package to grow lettuce and micro greens at home.

Micro-greens are the first tiny green seedlings of plants that are usually seeded outside in the spring and harvested when fully grown. They include lettuce, broccoli, basil, sunflowers, peas and seed mixes of cress, chard, mustard and many more. The taste of these little micro greens is beyond delicious, and fresh. In the blink of an eye — OK, perhaps mere days  — they are ready for eating after seeding.

Toss micro-greens on soup, pasta, sandwiches, eggs, vegetables and main dishes. Using them on your morning oatmeal might be a stretch, but they are genuine antioxidant nutrient boosters for eating and juicing.

Purchase specific micro-green labeled seeds from garden centers, online or use leftover seeds from your cache. One caution: Parsnip seeds used for micro-greens are poisonous, so only seed parsnips outside in the spring and grow until these root vegetables are fully mature.

Just like micro-greens, use what lettuce seeds are on hand or shop for any mix or type you like best among the categories: butterhead, looseleaf, crisphead and romaine.

Seeding

Clean and rinse an empty plastic lettuce container (or any low container). Poke some holes in the bottom for drainage.

For a larger mass of micro-greens and lettuce, try growing them in recyclable large aluminum pans sold at grocery and discount stores. Those pans are less expensive than specific seed-starting trays in most cases. Use a screwdriver or nail to poke holes in the bottom. Bonus, they are often sold with their own plastic cover, which works great as a dome over the tray until the seeds are up and moved under grow lights or near a sunny window.

Fill half to three-quarters of the plastic tray or aluminum pan with moistened, sterile seed starter or a very lightweight potting soil (not outside garden soil from the ground).

Heavily sprinkle micro-green seeds or leftover seeds over the soil. Use a separate tray for lettuce seeds since they will take longer to mature.Add a very light layer of soil over the seeds.

Water the seeded area well, using a sprinkler-type head instead of a regular pour-type nozzle which can move the seeds and soil around too much. Keep the seed bed moist.

Tray location and vare

Place the tray with the plastic cover near a sunny window or under grow lights that are 12 or so inches above the trays. Technically, growing micro-greens and lettuce under indoor grow lights is ideal, but if saving on expenses try growing them near a sunny window (not too close to chill the seeds). For small batches, which is always recommended on the first try, purchase a grow lightbulb sold at garden centers and hardware stores and position it toward the seed trays. Use a timer for turning on and off; 16 hours on and eight hours off works well.

Use a heated seed mat if you wish; it will hasten seed emergence.

Once the seeds are up (usually in two to 6 days; read the seed packet for days of emergence), promptly remove the plastic cover and place it near a very sunny window or under grow lights.

Water when the soil looks slightly dry, usually every day; they can dry out quickly, so keep an eye on them. Lack of water is sure death.

In about seven to 10 days, the fresh little micro-bursts of micro-greens should be ready for harvest. Lettuce will need a few more weeks to grow.

To harvest, cut a handful of micro-greens right above the soil line; they won’t need rinsing unless some soil is holding on. Continue harvesting the micro-greens until they are all cut.

Harvest the lettuce by cutting the leaves but leaving an inch of growth at the base of the plant which will grow back quickly and provide more lettuce to harvest. This is the same cut-and-come-again procedure often used when growing lettuce outside.

When the plants are spent, just flip over the tray of soil in the same container and do another batch of seeding. Continue this method for a time or two or use fresh potting soil. If indoor gnats become a problem, toss the soil, clean the containers and start over with fresh potting soil.

Betty Cahill speaks and writes about gardening in the Rocky Mountain Region. Visit her site at http://gardenpunchlist.blogspot.com/ for even more gardening tips.

LaShawnDa Pittman’s book begins with a table of women’s names — 74, to be exact — listing their first name, age, marital or dating status, and the number of children, grandchildren or great-grandchildren they have.

The common denominators among the women are that they are Black grandmothers who are raising any number of their children’s offspring, creating what is known as skipped generation households, those consisting of only grandparents and grandchildren.

In her book “Grandmothering While Black: A Twenty-First Century Story of Love, Coercion and Survival,” Pittman, associate professor of American ethnic studies at the University of Washington in Seattle, plumbs the nuances of the role of contemporary Black grandmothers in today’s landscape.

The Northwestern University alumna collected data from nearly 100 women on Chicago’s South Side for four years through in-depth interviews with the women and ethnographic research via doctor’s visits, welfare offices, school and day care center appointments, and caseworker meetings.

In so doing, Pittman explored the myriad forces that help and hinder their caregiving, taking a deep dive into the relationship between elder and youth where the former is working to fulfill the functions of motherhood without the legal rights of the role.

Pittman, a sociologist, showcases the strategies Black grandmothers use to manage their caregiving role among state and federal systems to ensure the well-being of the next generation.

“This book shows the complexity of what these grandmothers are up against. It’s a lot,” Pittman said. “This long lineage of Black women dealing with a lot and the importance of us in giving voice to what that looks like and giving each other opportunities to share that information … it’s not small.”

Pittman points out research that found more grandparents are currently raising their grandchildren than at any time in American history. The number of U.S. children living in a grandparent’s household more than doubled from 3.2% in 1970 to 8.4% in 2019, with 26% of those children in skipped generation households.

Two- and three-generational living arrangements are more prevalent in communities of color, with Black families being more likely than any other group to raise grandchildren in skipped generation households.

The factors that contribute to this range from changes in social and child-welfare policies and practices to increases in divorce rates and single parenthood and declining birth rates and marriage rates, as well as teen pregnancy, mental and physical health issues, child abuse and neglect. Black children also are the most like­ly to live in a sin­gle-par­ent fam­i­ly.

Compound that with some Black-grandmother-household incomes being at or below federal poverty levels and it raises a lot of questions. “Why and how do Black women’s traditional grandmother roles morph into surrogate parenting? How do they manage the demands of caregiving, including their lack of legal rights, challenges to making ends meet and inability to prioritize their personal lives?” Pittman writes in the book.

“There’s a lot of systemic things that force it upon us. … Incarcerated Black men and women, that’s had a huge ripple effect — it decimated our communities and families,” Pittman said. “It used to be that a Black man could work in some kind of manufacturing job and send their children to college and buy a home. Now, the physical labor jobs are in the service sector, they pay less, they don’t come with benefits, it’s harder to make it. There’s more discrimination. All of those kinds of things matter. Can you afford to live? Forget moving into the middle class, can you even maintain working class and not slip into poverty?”

Over the course of more than 300 pages, Pitman pores over the economic survival strategies Black grandmothers employ during the struggle of kinship care. It’s a mix of “burden and blessing,” rewards and consequences that range from an opportunity to parent again and a sense of purpose, to caregiving restricting retirement freedoms and impairing physical and mental health.

Raised in a family where her grandparents provided assistance to her immediate family, Pittman became interested in Black women and resilience as a graduate student at Northwestern. It was there that Pittman produced a thesis on Black women and their psychological well-being, and another work on the social capital of children in poverty.

All of it revolved around Black grandmothers raising grandchildren. Pittman found her purpose in making sense of the grandmothers’ perspectives, which eventually led to the book.

“You can no longer have a conversation about grandparent caregiving without talking about how they create the structure to provide that care,” she said. “It is not the way that it used to be where Big Mama stepped in, got the baby, enrolled it in school and has this harmonious relationship with parents, where the parent is bettering themselves so they can get their baby back. While that does happen, in too many cases, it does not.

“When conflict happens, and grandparents have no legal rights to their grandchildren, there’s a different set of issues they have to deal with and no book was dealing with that,” Pittman said. “Do I go over the parent and get legal guardianship, prove that the parent is unfit? Do I want to do that to my own child? It’s a complicated set of issues. Caregiving in the 21st century is a story that needs to be told for what it looks like today. How they navigate their lack of legal rights relative to parents, the child welfare system and in some cases, the criminal justice system. How they navigate to get resources, all of that is a big policy story.”

Pittman has spoken to policymakers around the nation to say: “Here are the resources that we say are available to these families, very few, and yet there are still all these barriers that they’re experiencing.”

She hopes her book highlights the travails Black grandmothers face. It’s a written charge for those in positions of power to think about the training of front-line workers who interact with these families.

Pittman said the people who work with skip generation families have a sense of “what did they do to contribute to this happening?”

But she says you shouldn’t assume you know their story. Dealing with the explicit and implicit bias and misinformation in the training of agency representatives will go a long way, she said.

Pittman said too often during her interviews with grandmothers, she found they felt alone in their caregiver role. To help fix that, Pittman is building out her website so Black grandmothers can share resources, knowledge and their stories with one another. She also hopes her book is a shoutout to the Black community.

“It’s raising awareness and providing a sense of solidarity. … It is so important for us to understand what we are asking of our mothers, grandmothers and aunts,” Pittman said. “Understand that these are the kinds of sacrifices, complexities that our mothers and aunties have to deal with. And grandfathers too. Most skip generation households are headed by both grandparents. But Black grandmothers have the distinction of being more likely than all other grandparents of doing this without a parent or a partner.”

Pittman said reaching out to the Black grandmothers in our communities would go a long way. She said Black matriarchs want to sustain their families and communities, but they also need to take care of their own health, and need respite and support.

“If you know there are people in your family who are doing this, see what they need. Don’t assume that they got it,” she said. “I hear people say stuff like, ‘They do it out of love.’ Why should we not make sure that children have what they need in this country regardless of who their caregivers are? We do it for foster parents.”

She looked at how in pop culture, Black grandmothers tend to be romanticized within the Black community and pathologized outside of it. And she wondered: “Where do you go to get a sense of who these women really are?”

That’s why Pittman is focused on making Real Black Grandmothers, the first digital archive created specifically with their reality in mind. Pittman said society has to continue to make changes that will support skipped generation households because putting together two vulnerable populations and asking them to figure it out themselves is asking too much.

“The complexity of what they’re dealing with, the brilliance of ‘we will find a way,’ the brilliance with which they navigated, the strategies they came up with to keep their grandchildren in their care safe and still try to get what they needed, blew me away,” Pittman said. “Yes, they did that in a miraculous and amazing way and it’s still not enough. We need to make it so it’s not so hard.”

©2024 Chicago Tribune. Visit at chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

“Origin” tops our list of must-see releases, along with an intense standoff in space and a family drama set next door to a Nazi death camp.

Here’s our roundup.

“Origin”: Ava DuVernay accomplishes the impossible, adapting Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist/author Isabel Wilkerson’s uncinematic book, “Caste: The Origins of Our Discontent.” It’s a hefty tome that postulates the root of oppression is tied not to skin color nor creed but to a global caste system that anoints a select group to be superior over all. From this hefty thesis DuVernay delivers an intellectually stimulating, emotionally gratifying film swirling with ideas. It’s a screenwriting and directorial triumph for the visionary filmmaker of “Selma.” Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor turns in an impassioned performance as Wilkerson, an accomplished writer who reluctantly embarks on a research mission as she’s reeling from a one-two punch of family tragedies. DuVernay’s screenplay crackles with brainy, kinetic energy and generates complex, substantial conversations that put lightning into Wilkerson’s theory. She also devotes equal time to making Wilkerson, beautifully played by Ellis-Taylor, a multi-dimensional person struggling with the heft of history and a sudden burden of grief.

Through historical flashbacks and research trips that jet Wilkerson to Germany and India, along with enlightening talks with loved ones, Wilkerson pieces together a convincing argument that opens the window to looking at race and oppression of others into a thought-provoking new way. DuVernay’s film will make your heart ache in the process, as will Jon Bernthal’s tender performance as Wilkerson’s husband. This is exciting, challenging filmmaking that works on every emotional and intellectual level. What a shame “Origin” hasn’t gained traction in this year’s Oscar conversation. It more than deserves to be right alongside other contenders bucking for that best picture prize. Details: 4 stars out of 4; opens Jan. 19 in Bay Area theaters.

“The Zone of Interest”: Jonathan Glazer’s latest ambitious feature — the best film of 2023 – defies categorization and convention. It gives us a front-row seat to the comings-and-goings and daily routines of a high-ranking German couple and their spawn. The difference here is that the year is 1943, and the patriarch of the family is Rudolf Höss (Christian Friedel), commandant of the notorious Nazi death camp, Auschwitz, which borders the family’s sprawling estate. Glazer loosely adapts Martin Amis’ 2014 novel and has created a silent scream on the mundanity of evil, and how tasks performed within our own zones of interest — perhaps advancing one’s career or gaining power and influence — can make being responsible for the massacre of a million people seem like just another stepping stone in one’s career. Friedel and Sandra Hüller, as his aggressively ambitious wife, wear their masks of evil chillingly well. “The Zone of Interest” is a unique cinematic experience (the sounds issuing from Auschwitz are almost a supporting performance, and will haunt you forever) that all but demands it be viewed in one sustained gulp in a theater, not at home. I’ve seen it twice and will see it again, not only being astonished by the craftsmanship displayed in every scene but for its timeless warning that sadly will never grow outdated. It’s brilliant. Details: 4 stars; in theaters now.

“I.S.S.”: If you come to Gabriela Cowperthwaite’s thoughtful “what if” space movie anticipating a pure adrenaline ride that’s bereft of ideas, get an E-ticket to a different destination. That’s because the director of “Blackfish” and “Megan Leavey,” along with screenwriter Nick Shafir, venture beyond standard sci-fi tropes to convey a dire warning about our paranoia of “the other.” Don’t get me wrong. This “trapped door” space odyssey is no slouch in the suspense department as six International Space Station cosmonauts – three Americans, three Russians – face orders from their governments to take over I.S.S. by any means necessary after war breaks out on Earth. The sharp-edged premise makes its bloody point well while the cast headed by Oscar winner Ariana DeBose and Chris Messina make us care about what happens in space and on the ground. Details: 3 stars; opens Jan. 19 in area theaters.

“The Beekeeper”: There’s something cathartic and downright therapeutic about seeing Jason Statham as a retired operative kick the living daylights out of hackers preying on an older generation. Screenwriter/director David Ayer relishes in going wildly over the top in preposterous ways, amping up the violence to ridiculous extremes and never allowing the audience to come up for air. It’s a classic B-movie (get it?) steeped in tortured bee metaphors that’ll make you chuckle and action set pieces that’ll have you cheering. Everyone in the cast cranks up the hamminess to delirious levels, from Josh Hutcherson as an annoying coke-snorting rich brat who’s the ringleader of the online hoodwinking scams and Oscar winner Jeremy Irons as a total tool who runs security for said brat. Much of it is illogical, preposterous over-the-top ridiculous, which is what makes it such a guilty pleasure and one of Statham’s and Ayer’s best films. We can only hope there’s a whole colony of “Beekeeper” movies in the future. Details: 3 stars; in theaters now.

Find of the week

“Driving Madeline”: Sometimes that weathered adage about looks being deceiving does prove out. In its opening moments, one might assume this drama centered on 92-year-old Madeleine’s (Line Renaud) taxi ride with driver Charles (Dany Boon) through Paris will be a ham-fisted tearjerker. But this much more ambitious than a pull-on-the-heartstrings road trip. Christian Carion’s seventh feature steers clear of hackneyed tropes, alternating between jarring flashbacks of Madeleine’s hard domestic younger years and those intimate conversations between this unlikely duo who form a bond as the day shifts into night. “Madeleine” is a showcase for its two leads; both are exceptional. So is the film, which gently reminds us to feel compassion for others since we never quite know where another person has been or where they might be going. Details: 3 stars; opens Jan. 19 at select theaters.

“Hazbin Hotel”: Amazon Prime’s raucous, raunchy new series is certain to be one of the hottest animated comedies of the season. It takes place in a hotel in hell (you read that right) run by a do-gooding princess tinkering with a plan to help guests earn their wings in order to augment the overpopulation problems plaguing damnation. It’s a hilarious premise, and originated as a 2019 YouTube pilot from creator Vivienne Medrano that garnered more than 92 million views. Each outlandish episode is filled with wicked wit and even busts out with a bit of song and dance.  A revolving team of guest voices descend to these fiery pits of what will likely turn into a cult sensation. Details: 3 stars; drops Jan. 19 on Amazon Prime.

“The Woman in the Wall”: The nondescript title suggests creator Joe Murtagh’s six-part BBC One series (releasing on Showtime and Paramount+) will be another routine domestic thriller, a hazy mystery along the lines of “The Woman in the Window.” While there are conventional elements tossed in here and there and a few comedic moments, this one’s shooting for bigger fish, focused on Lorna (Ruth Wilson), an outcast in a small Irish village that time forgot as she confronts more trauma in the wake of the abusive time spent when she was younger at a fictional convent that’s part of the Magdalene Laundries. A well-known priest’s murder sets off an investigation headed by a Belfast detective (Daryl McCormack of “Good Luck to You, Leo Grande”) who also has childhood ties to the church and the dead man. Shortly thereafter, the prone-to sleepwalking Lorna wakes up after a night of drinking and bad behavior and finds a body of a woman in her house. Although “The Woman in the Wall” relies too often on coincidences, it’s a compulsively watchable series with a volcanic performance by Wilson and another appealing one from McCormack. Details: 3 stars; available on streaming and On Demand Jan. 19 for Paramount+ subscribers with Showtime and then releasing Jan. 21 on Paramount+ with Showtime.

“Death and Other Details”: This Hulu mystery series set on a ritzy cruise liner containing obnoxious rich folk will float the boat of any Agatha Christie fan, especially those wishing there was some sex, kinky and otherwise, going on below decks. Showrunners Mike Weiss and Heidi Cole McAdams don’t go overboard in that department as the so-called “world’s greatest detective” Rufus Cotesworth (Mandy Patinkin) joins sleuthing forces with someone who absolutely detests him, a hanger-on to a wealthy family on board, Imogene Scott (Violett Beane). The estranged duo crossed paths when Rufus was investigating the murder of Imogene’s mother and failed to nab the killer. That crime surfaces again as all sorts of sordid shenanigans — blackmail, dirty business takeovers and so on — go down once Rufus’ loyal assistant winds up dead with a harpoon in his chest. More get slain and there are many seaworthy suspects in this engaging if overextended mystery (eight episodes would have been fine), which benefits from fine deductive interplay between Patinkin and Beane — who should become a star. Hulu only made eight of the 10 episodes available to watch, and the series picks up steam as it proceeds. Details: 2½ stars; two episodes available now with one episode dropping each Tuesday through March 5.

“The Settlers”: At the turn of the 20th century on Tierra del Fuego, three men — a Texas braggart (Benjamin Westfall), an out-of-his-league Scottish officer (Mark Stanley) and a wary mixed-race tracker (Camilo Arancibia) — embark on a journey at the behest of a corrupt landowner to pinpoint the best route for transporting cattle. That synopsis sounds like this is nothing more than a John Ford/Sergio Leone homage, but Chile’s Oscar submission for best international film corrals bigger ideas, with director/co-screenwriter Felipe Galvez Haberle’s debut exposing colonization’s inherent nastiness. Details: 3½ stars; opens Jan. 19 at the Roxie in San Francisco.

“The Teachers’ Lounge”: A bad situation only worsens hour by ticking hour for principled teacher Carla Nowak (Leonie Benesch) in director Ilker Çatak’s beyond-intense feature, Germany’s short-listed Oscar entry for best international feature. A seemingly minor theft observed by Carla in the teachers’ lounge snowballs into an ethical avalanche, uprooting educators, parents and students. Çatak puts Benesch through the acting wringer in one of the year’s most propulsive, nerve-rattling dramas you’ll see this year. Not for one second does this film lag. Details: 3½ stars; now in select theaters.

Contact Randy Myers at soitsrandy@gmail.com.

Her husband was away on business, and her sons, 9 and 11, were sleeping down the hall in the family’s otherwise cozy suburban home. But Chavez’s heart thumped “violently” in her chest, and she couldn’t calm her breaths. She thought she might die.

As Chavez, 44, writes in her new memoir, “Everyone But Myself” (Zibby Books, 240 pages) she was having a classic panic attack. She was convinced she would go into anaphylactic shock due to an allergic reaction; earlier in the day, she had been exposed to pollen at her son’s baseball game.

Even though some part of Chavez knew her fears were irrational, she couldn’t stop the racing thoughts. She managed to survive the night without going into the dreaded respiratory distress but woke the next morning realizing she desperately needed help.

Somehow, she had developed a major anxiety disorder, as she had tried to achieve “a perfectly happy life.” Proud of her confidence and competence, she had a good marriage, thriving kids and a nice home. She also kept busy with a fulfilling job and volunteering. Her therapist later told her she was having a “mid-mom crisis,” common to working mothers who find themselves massively over-extended.

Chavez’s book is an account of her search for relief and what she learned in the process. Among other things, she shed the misconceptions that mental health disorders don’t strike someone like her, and that a panic attack is just something you “get over.” Chavez, who moved to the Bay Area in 2014, also found new ways to communicate with her husband, Mando, and to adjust her expectations about being a parent. She hasn’t had such an attack since, but that’s because she’s become attuned to triggers and managing stress as it arises.

Here she talks about her journey.

Q: Had you had issues with anxiety or depression before? You mentioned that when you were in high school in Colorado you had a bad breakup that sent you into a spiral and you took Zoloft, an antidepressant.

A: After my first son was born, I (also) had a really hard time. (But) I don’t think I ever experienced the generalized anxiety that happened when the events in the book took place.

Q: You trace your panic attack to five months earlier when you had a reaction to standard allergy shots. You had to go back to the doctor’s office to get shots of epinephrine and prednisone to alleviate a rash, but those drugs really amped you up and made you feel almost out of control. Can you talk about that?

A: That really was a traumatic experience for me in terms of my chief fear — that something would happen to me that would leave my boys and my family without me. So the combination of the allergy shots and the physical experience of this systemic reaction to the medications — those combined left me feeling like things were precarious. What I didn’t do was deal with that experience. I kept moving forward and put more on my to-do list.

Q: After that, the anxiety receded into the background for a few months. How did it return when you were at your son’s baseball game and escalate into a full-blown panic attack?

A: I’m sitting under these trees that are raining pollen and petals. I started to sneeze and get itchy eyes. These are normal seasonal allergies and something that’s happened to me since I was a child. But since I was in this burned-out, depleted place, I wondered: Did I mess up my system by getting these shots? The thought that I had over-sensitized my system and that this would lead to another potential anaphylaxis was just enough for me to go into a panic and not be able to stop that spiral.

Q: You describe what was going on in your brain and body as being as if some kind of switch got turned on and there’s no way you can turn it off.

A: Correct: The switch analogy. I understood the mental part of it. I had never felt that full-body sensation of anxiety. It really did feel like something was different inside my body that I couldn’t discern.

Q: Did it add to your stress that you knew that your fear about anaphylaxis was irrational but you still had the fear?

A: If I know this to be true, cognitively and intellectually, that this is not a possibility, then why am I still captive by it? It does add to that out-of-control feeling.

Q: It sounds like the principal of the elementary school where you worked was very understanding, especially after you received some advice from a doctor to just quit your job if you felt so overwhelmed.

A: (The principal) was wonderful. She called it a “working-mom meltdown.” She said this is a thing that happens when you go back to work. She did what I needed at the time, which was to validate that experience and say, you’re not crazy. The second thing she did was to give me the space to not make a decision (about quitting my job). By slowing me down and saying, let’s not make a decision today, she was giving me permission to actually figure myself out. (If I had quit) I wouldn’t have gotten that job back, necessarily.

Q: After that, you found a good therapist, Kim, and you had a great visit with Tim, an amazing physician’s assistant who works for your primary care physician. He put you back on Zoloft.

A: I went to see Kim first and things initially started to get a little bit worse. Once you open your Pandora’s box, when you haven’t been feeling things for a while, they come back with a vengeance. But from that point on, I really felt like I had the basic tools in place.

Q: Can you talk about the challenges you and your husband faced over that summer, especially with communication?

A: My husband and I are generally a happy couple. When I was in the dark place, as I affectionately call it, I didn’t have the words to communicate that to him. He didn’t have an ability to understand it, because he hadn’t experienced it. Until you’ve experienced anxiety and depression, you really do have a hard time not assigning some sort of responsibility to the person who is struggling. I should also say, I was out of practice expressing how I was feeling.

And, we had gotten into those really busy years, of our life with kids. It’s like a logistics Olympics that you’re engaged in every day. (Since then), I think it’s informed the way we talk to each other now, the way we talk to our kids.

Q: What can you say about learning to take care of yourself? You mentioned easing up on the volunteering and doing jigsaw puzzles, reading again, getting into yoga, exercising on a Peloton bike.

A: The way back to myself was paved with very small steps that ended up being powerful. The first was the medication and going into therapy. Exercise, going to yoga, doing the puzzles, reading: They represented time for myself and a slowing down. They allowed me to tolerate stillness and to slowly build those muscles back up. Eventually, they allowed me to reconnect to the joy of things. The puzzles are interesting. Every time I finished a puzzle, I took a picture of it. It was creating evidence for myself that I was taking time for myself. It was a project that had a discrete beginning and end, so I could feel a sense of completion.

Q: When the new school year came, you returned to work and your kids went back to school. You tell a really good story about how your oldest son came home from his first day of middle school to say that you all had missed the note about coming prepared with notebooks and other supplies. What was your reaction, and how was it different than what it would have been the year before?

A: (The year before) I probably would have left right then to buy school supplies. I would have felt embarrassed. This year, I laughed, and his dad took him the next day. And it worked out. I had learned that perfection strangles joy. And, the reality is that I care about loving my boys to the best of my ability, but sometimes that gets confused with doing things for them to the best of my ability, and those are different. It was a huge moment, where I thought, “Oh well. Mistakes help you improve.” For me to be that kind and good to myself, to be a friend to myself, instead of a critic, was a lesson that I still really treasure.

Q: How did you and your family fare during COVID lockdown? And, given your fear of shots, how did you do with vaccines?

A: Thankfully, we had learned better ways to communicate with each other. (With the vaccine), Mando was not able to go with me for my first shot. I took a friend. (Before) I would have been embarrassed to say I was scared to go and get a shot. Now I ask for what I need. That’s the worst part for me of anxiety and depression. Those voices will say you are alone. You are not alone. Finding that support is a gift.

Anthony Anderson kicked off the 75th Primetime Emmys with a bang — though a much less controversial one than that of last weekend’s Golden Globes.

The 53-year-old host, who boasts 11 Primetime Emmy nominations of his own, opened the show by narrating — and playing piano for — a skit honoring some of TV’s most notable series.

The “Black-ish” star previously teased that a tribute to iconic television shows — with the help of stars from “Cheers” and “The Sopranos” — would be a part of the ceremony.

“Welcome to our Emmys neighborhood, on this beautiful MLK Day. I love television and tonight we celebrate 75 years of Emmys. We’re going to commemorate the greatest shows of today,” Anderson began, noting the night would also honor the classics that paved the way for the modern landscape of the small screen. “Television has helped shape the world, and more importantly, it helped shape me.”

The shows highlighted by Anderson included the likes of “Good Times,” “The Facts of Life,” and “Miami Vice” — which saw Anderson and drummer Travis Barker doing a rendition of Phil Collins’ “In the Air Tonight.”

“Tonight, we’re giving out 27 awards,” Anderson also said. “That means 27 acceptance speeches. So I’d like to ask you all to keep those speeches tight.”

He jokingly warned his mother, Doris Bowman, would help ensure that happens — replacing playoff music with the role of “Playoff Mama.”

After Bowman demonstrated her ability to get even her son off the stage, Anderson brought out first presenter — and Best Actress in a Comedy Series nominee — Christina Applegate (“Dead to Me”). The Emmy winner, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, was given a standing ovation as she was walked out.

Anderson’s monologue, much like the Emmys themselves, proved far more buttoned-up than Jo Koy’s at the Golden Globes, with the stand-up’s gig slammed as everything from “sexist” to a “comedic disaster.”

Every great city deserves an easily identifiable sandwich of its own. Whether it’s the Philadelphia cheesesteak or the New Orleans po’boy, a gut-busting sandwich is a matter of civic pride.

When most people think of Chicago’s sandwich of choice, the first answer is usually the Italian beef sandwich. (Unless you are one of those people who thinks a hot dog is a sandwich.) After all, you can find one in most neighborhoods, and locals love to argue relentlessly about where to find the best. The popularity of the sandwich has only grown recently thanks to “The Bear,” an FX show that follows a fine dining chef who has to return to his family’s Italian beef stand.

But looking through the Tribune’s archives, it’s a bit shocking to find that the Italian beef hasn’t been the obvious sandwich choice for that long. Unlike barbecue, which shows up in the archives all the way back in the 1850s, the Italian beef doesn’t even make an appearance until the 1950s.

Chicagoans were eating sandwiches with beef long before then, though. It’s just that they were either roast beef sandwiches or, more likely, corned beef sandwiches.

As critic Louisa Chu explained well back in 2019, “Chicago is a corned beef town, unlike New York, Los Angeles or Montreal, where they prefer pastrami.” While true today, Chicagoans were apparently even more obsessed with corned beef in the early 20th century.

That was when John P. Harding, also known as “Corned Beef John,” had 12 restaurants downtown serving the dish, including Harding Grill (131 N. Clark St.) and Harding’s Colonial Room (21 S. Wabash Ave.). According to an article from Sept. 22, 1922, Harding “started the craze for the ‘make ’em before your eyes’ corned beef sandwich.” An article from Aug. 15, 1926, went even further, claiming his “chief bid for fame, however, is in having made the corned beef sandwich what it is today.”

The Tribune loved to throw superlatives at Harding. He transformed the Star Theater at 68 W. Madison into a restaurant in 1918, and when he planned to open another downtown restaurant, the paper felt the need to write this: “Mr. Harding four years ago answered in the affirmative the momentous question: ‘Is the corned beef sandwich mightier than the movies.’”

Corned beef also made Harding a very rich man. On Dec. 4, 1928, the Tribune referred to Harding as a “millionaire restaurant owner,” while noting how he wielded a knife “dexterously” when he “carved corned beef for fifty guests at a dinner given last night in honor of Harry Hackney of Atlantic City, president of the National Restaurant Association.”

So when did the Italian beef overtake corned beef? The 1920s is when many of the Italian beef origin stories pop up, with both Pasquale Scala and Tony Ferreri mentioned as possibly inventing the dish. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any mentions in the Tribune archive during that time period.

In fact, the first clear mention of the Italian beef that I was able to find wasn’t until June 28, 1953. It wasn’t exactly a grand introduction. The very short post, titled “Old Peoples Home Aids Plan Benefit Picnic,” explains how “the ladies auxiliary and men’s league of Villa Scalabrini will hold their second annual picnic at noon next Sunday at the villa in Northlake … Italian beef and sausage sandwiches and spumoni will be served [to] guests.” That’s it.

According to “The Chicago Food Encyclopedia,” the origins of the Italian beef probably weren’t from either Scala or Ferreri, but instead “lie in Italian American home cooking.” In particular, the book points to “so-called ‘peanut weddings’” in the 1920s where the dish was often served because it was affordable and could easily feed a crowd.

As noted above, nothing was mentioned during the time, but on May 11, 1979, the Chicago Italian American Organization did an advertisement for a “‘40s Italian Wedding” fundraiser where you could experience “an authentic 1940s Italian ‘peanut wedding.’” The first food mentioned is the beef sandwich.

The Italian beef pops up occasionally in the 1950s and 1960s, though most often in restaurant ads, like the one on Nov. 14, 1954, for the “grand opening of delivery service” for Barsanti’s Grill at 3404 Lincoln Ave., which specialized in “pizza, spaghetti, ravioli, Italian beef sandwiches, bar-b-q ribs, southern fried chicken and french fried shrimp.” On July 28, 1963, The New Parkette at 105th and Western printed its menu, which shows that an Italian beef sandwich cost 60 cents.

On May 26, 1962, we get what may be the first recipe for the Italian beef from Mary Meade. (As I found out recently, the name was a pseudonym for a number of different women writers.) There’s a lot of tomato paste, which isn’t as common today, but the recipe looks pretty close. Plus it has the first mention of dipping bread in the beef juices: “In the true Italian fashion, the sliced Italian or French bread should be dipped into the stock before being layered with the thin slices of beef.”

But it was not until the 1970s that the Italian beef truly took off with Tribune reporters. On May 17, 1975, in the Chicago Tribune Magazine, Charles Leroux visited a number of drive-ins around the city, including Mr. Beef: “They have a wonderfully spicy sausage sandwich [75 cents] and a killer Italian beef sandwich [$1.05]. A photographer friend says he can’t face the drive home without a Mr. Beef beef dripping into his lap.”

Even cats started appreciating the sandwich. In one of the stranger stories I’ve ever come across in the archives, author Mary Daniels wrote on Oct. 6, 1976, about Nick Fischer’s cat that weighed 23 pounds and once “stole an 11-pound turkey.” Then Fischer explained that when he gets a beef sandwich, “I have to get him one, too. Without peppers.”

By Jan. 8, 1979, the Italian beef was apparently so ubiquitous that Phyllis Magida could write this: “Rare is the Chicagoan who doesn’t know to dip pierogi in sour cream, or how to hold a taco, or to demand hot pepper with Italian beef.”

The Italian beef really took off in the 1980s. In a Sept. 26, 1980, article about where to spot celebrities in the city, Barbara Molotsky wrote that Neil Diamond apparently really liked the Italian beef at Al’s. The sandwich became a fixture for numerous businesses at Taste of Chicago, which launched for the first time in 1980. Even fine dining chefs started discussing the sandwich. In an article from Oct. 15, 1982, Gail Bernstein asked chefs where they enjoyed eating after closing time, and multiple chefs mentioned grabbing an Italian beef. On Nov. 3, 1983, JeanMarie Brownson even offered a recipe for “cheesy Italian beef sandwiches,” proving that cheese was a common topping for the sandwich in the 1980s.

By Sept. 15, 1989, Manuel Galvan felt confident enough to declare that the Italian beef was “Chicago’s sandwich.” That said, the article is more interesting for mentioning that Jay Leno, who at that time didn’t have his own show, brought “a bagful of beefs to ‘Late Night with David Letterman’” when it was taping in Chicago four months before. “As he and the host traded laughs, Leno ate a couple of Italian beefs and frequently told the Chicago audience the sandwiches came from Mr. Beef.”

This is around the time when Chicago transplants started writing in to complain about how they can’t get a good Italian beef anywhere else. On Aug. 16, 1990, Edward Agustin from Norcross, Georgia, wrote a “plea for help from a displaced Chicagoan” about how much he missed the “wet mess of sandwich.” On July 25, 2001, Jerry Goodman from Florida said he’d love a recipe for the sandwich because he really missed those “morsels.”

Finally, on Oct. 12, 2005, there was no doubt about the status of the Italian beef sandwich in Chicago. That’s when the sandwich was included in Bill Daley’s article about “10 Chicago icons.” There the Italian beef shared space with other recognized Chicago food classics like deep-dish pizza and the Chicago hot dog.

Nick Kindelsperger is a former Tribune food critic.

©2024 Chicago Tribune. Visit chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Awards season is set to roll on tonight with the much-delayed 75th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards.

The ceremony, which celebrates the best in TV and streaming each year, was initially scheduled to take place in September. But organizers were forced to push the date back due to strikes by writers and actors in Hollywood.

The switch-up has nestled the Emmys in the heart of awards season, just eight days after a Golden Globes Awards ceremony that drew headlines when its host, Jo Koy, bombed with a low-laugh, high-cringe monologue.

The man hoping to dodge a repeat and find the humor as Emmys host? Anthony Anderson, the 53-year-old funnyman known for films including “Kangaroo Jack” and TV shows like “Black-ish” and “Law & Order: SVU.”

Here’s what you should know before viewing the ceremony.

What time are the Emmys?

The Emmys are set to begin today at 8 p.m. ET. The three-hour ceremony will be broadcast live from the Peacock Theater, a modern 7,100-seat venue in downtown Los Angeles.

Those looking to scope out the fashions and catch off-the-cuff comments can tune in for red carpet coverage from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

What channel will air the Emmys?

Fox is broadcasting the ceremony, which will land on Hulu on the following day. The “Countdown to the Emmys” red carpet coverage airs on E!, which will also feature an “Emmys After Party” special at 11 p.m.

Why is it so late?

With thousands of screenwriters and actors on strike last summer, the organizers of the Emmys decided to push the ceremony into the new year.

The strike by the Writers Guild of America, a screenwriters’ union, lasted until September, while a separate stoppage by the SAG-AFTRA actors’ union dragged into November.

It’s the first time the Emmys had a significant rescheduling since 2001, when the 9/11 terrorist attacks caused the ceremony to be moved to November.

In 2020, the Emmys went on as scheduled despite the COVID pandemic — in a mostly virtual format. A mannequin dressed in a hazmat suit stood guard over the trophies that year.

What has host Anthony Anderson said?

Hosting an awards show is a tricky gig, something Koy learned quickly at the Golden Globes. At one point in his monologue, the comedian erupted at the audience.

“Yo, I got the gig 10 days ago,” Koy said. “You want a perfect monologue? Yo, shut up. You’re kidding me, right? Slow down.”

After Koy’s struggles, the bar may be a bit lower than usual for Anderson, who got his gig a month ago and told “Entertainment Tonight” that hosting the Emmys is a job he has “always wanted to do.”

“I wanted it to happen years ago, but everything happens when it’s supposed to happen,” Anderson told the outlet. “So, I’m really excited.”

Anderson plans to employ an “unconventional plan for keeping things moving,” using his mother as an enforcer to usher off award recipients giving long-winded speeches, an Emmys statement said.

Before he hits the stage, though, Anderson’s selection has already stirred a bit of controversy: Some have noted he has faced sexual assault allegations in the past, which he denies.

What to watch for

The series predicted to take home trophies tonight include “Succession,” the Brian Cox-led show loosely based on Fox News and the Murdoch family; “The Last of Us,” a gloomy zombie drama set after a pandemic far more devastating than COVID; and “The White Lotus,” a booze-infused anthology that traveled to an Italian resort this season.

“Succession,” which wrapped its series run last year, leads the way with a total of 27 nominations. “The Last of Us” picked up 24, while “The White Lotus” nabbed 23.

“Ted Lasso,” the Jason Sudeikis comedy about an American football coach who moves to England to coach soccer, could find some redemption after failing to score hardware at the Golden Globes. It received 21 nominations.

In a statement, Frank Scherma, chairman of the Television Academy, which puts on the Emmys, hailed “another year of extraordinary content.”

“We are honored to recognize those who have elevated the world’s favorite global medium,” he added.

———

©2024 New York Daily News. Visit at nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The 2024 Emmys are here, almost four months delayed due to the now-settled writers’ and actors’ strikes. Hollywood is finally ready to celebrate the best in television, with the 75th annual ceremony scheduled for Monday, Jan. 15 at 8 p.m. ET.

It comes just a week after the Golden Globes handed out awards for TV and film, where HBO’s “Succession,” Netflix’s “Beef” and Hulu’s “The Bear” dominated their categories. Could their wins be indicative of another big night on Monday?

The eligibility window is for shows that aired between June 1 2022 and May 31, 2023, so shows like “Dahmer — Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story” (which first aired on Netflix in Sept. 2022) and the first season of “The Bear,” will be up for Emmy consideration.

Here are our predictions:

Drama series

• “Andor”
• “Better Call Saul”
• “The Crown”
• “House of the Dragon”
• “The Last of Us”
• “The White Lotus”
• “Yellowjackets”
• “Succession” — Winner

The critically acclaimed juggernaut from HBO and creator Jesse Armstrong won 4 awards at the Globes, taking home Best Television Series – Drama, and Best Actor awards in leading and supporting roles for Sarah Snook, Matthew Macfadyen and Kieran Culkin. With all the steam coming off the conclusion of a fiery final season, look for “Succession” to keep its momentum going into the Emmys. It is being considered for its final season, and is considered by many critics to be a lock for the night’s top prize.

Comedy series

• “Abbott Elementary”
• “Barry”
• “Jury Duty”
• “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel”
• “Only Murders in the Building”
• “Ted Lasso”
• “Wednesday”
• “The Bear”  — Winner

The surprise success from Christopher Storer is being considered for its first season, and although “The Bear” might not be your prototypical comedy, it’s proving to be a favorite for critics who appreciate its phenomenal acting. Last week it was awarded the Golden Globe for Best Television Series – Musical or Comedy. Series star Jeremy Allen White also took home the Golden Globe for Best Performance by a Male Actor in a Television Series – Musical or Comedy, and Ayo Edebiri won for Best Female Actor in the same category.

Limited series

• “Beef”
• “Dahmer — Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story”
• “Daisy Jones & the Six”
• “Obi-Wan Kenobi”
• “Fleishman Is in Trouble” — Winner

The miniseries drama written by Taffy Brodesser-Akner, based on her 2019 novel of the same name, is some of the best writing to hit TV in recent memory. Although, “Beef” swept at the Golden Globes, it didn’t have to contend with “Fleishman Is in Trouble,” which is bolstered by some excellent acting from Claire Danes and Jesse Eisenberg. Surprisingly, it’s Lizzy Caplan who is nominated as the lead actress from “Fleishman,”  but she’s also more-than deserving.

Lead actor, drama

• Jeff Bridges, “The Old Man”
• Brian Cox, “Succession”
• Kieran Culkin, “Succession”
• Bob Odenkirk, “Better Call Saul”
• Pedro Pascal, “The Last of Us”
• Jeremy Strong, “Succession” — Winner

Denied at the Globes and snubbed from the SAG Awards, Strong can only be ignored for so long. Co-star Kieran Culkin won at the Golden Globes, which came as a surprise to many, and Brian Cox would have been a more viable choice if he had appeared in more of the show’s final season (spoiler alert!). Bob Odenkirk is also a strong candidate, as he’s been nominated six times now for his role in “Better Call Saul” and has yet to win.

Lead actress, drama

• Sharon Horgan, “Bad Sisters”
• Melanie Lynskey, “Yellowjackets”
• Elisabeth Moss, “The Handmaid’s Tale”
• Bella Ramsey, “The Last of Us”
• Keri Russell, “The Diplomat”
• Sarah Snook, “Succession” — Winner

“This show has changed my life,” Snook said when she accepted the Golden Globe just a week ago. Indeed, “Succession” seems to be on a legendary awards trajectory and Snook’s performance warrants all the accolades. The Australian actress has been nominated three times previously for her role as the calculating and cold-hearted Shiv Roy, but has yet to take home the Emmy. This feels like the year she finally gets it.

Lead actor, comedy

Jason Segel, “Shrinking”

Martin Short, “Only Murders in the Building”

Jason Sudeikis, “Ted Lasso”

Jeremy Allen White, “The Bear”

Bill Hader, “Barry” — Winner

Although Jeremy Allen White is the favorite after winning the Golden Globe, Bill Hader’s performance will be tough to overlook, especially coming off the final season of his hit HBO series “Barry.” It’s a stretch to say that the show is still a comedy at this point, with recent seasons taking a much darker turn, tonally. But that should help Hader’s case, as he gets to show off even more of his excellent dramatic acting chops.

Lead actress, comedy

• Christina Applegate, “Dead to Me”
• Rachel Brosnahan, “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel”
• Natasha Lyonne, “Poker Face”
• Jenna Ortega, “Wednesday”
• Quinta Brunson, “Abbott Elementary” — Winner

Brunson won an Emmy last year as a writer for “Abbott Elementary” and is poised this year to take home another one for her strong performance in the series. Her role as second-grade teacher Janine Teagues stands at the center of the fan-favorite comedy and her deadpan humor is often where the laughs originate. Ayo Edibiri (“The Bear”) won the category at the Globes, but is noticeably absent from the Emmy list.

Lead actor, limited series/TV movie

• Taron Egerton, “Black Bird”
• Kumail Nanjiani, “Welcome to Chippendales”
• Evan Peters, “Dahmer – Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story”
• Daniel Radcliffe, “Weird: The Al Yankovic Story”
• Michael Shannon, “George & Tammy”
• Steven Yeun, “Beef” — Winner

Yeun took home the Golden Globe and is just too talented in the show to miss out on another win. Netflix’s hit first season features Yeun and Ali Wong as Danny Cho and Amy Lau, two strangers who meet in a road rage incident that grows into a epic feud. The show received a total of 13 Emmy nominations, and might have Monday’s second-strongest showing after “Succession.”

Lead actress, limited series/TV movie

• Lizzy Caplan, “Fleishman Is in Trouble”
• Jessica Chastain, “George & Tammy”
• Dominique Fishback, “Swarm”
• Kathryn Hahn, “Tiny Beautiful Things”
• Riley Keough, “Daisy Jones & the Six”
• Ali Wong, “Beef” — Winner

The stand-up comedian, actress, writer, producer and director can seemingly do it all, and it’s no different with her dramatic turn in “Beef.” Winning at the Globes is indicative of “Beef’s” staying power this awards season, but Wong’s win is even more a credit to her excellent performance. With another win, she could join her new beau, Bill Hader, in the winner’s circle. Did you know they’re dating? 

©2024 New York Daily News. Visit nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.