LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) - The Tony Awards will have a touch of Hollywood glamor as the theatrical community gathers to honor the best of Broadway.

Tom Hanks, Scarlett Johansson and Cuba Gooding Jr. are among the movie stars who have been tasked with handing out awards at the ceremony. Hanks is starring in the hit play "Lucky Guy" and received a Tony nomination for his work.

Johansson appeared in a critically maligned revival of "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" earlier this year and won a Tony in 2010 for her work in "A View From the Bridge." Gooding is in the revival of "The Trip to Bountiful," but his work was overlooked by Tony voters.

Jesse Eisenberg, Jon Cryer and Martha Plimpton are among the other big names being tapped as presenters. Eisenberg wrote and co-starred opposite Vanessa Redgrave in the Off-Broadway production of "The Revisionist" this spring, while Plimpton has been a regular on New York's stages.

The 2013 Tony telecast airs on CBS on June 9 at 8/7c. Neil Patrick Harris will return as the ceremony's host.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - American chef Richard Blais may be best known for using gimmicks and gadgets in his television appearances but in his first cookbook, "Try This At Home!", he shows his cooking can be fun and tasty without being complicated.

The 41-year-old used often used liquid nitrogen and immersion circulators to make dishes on the U.S. cooking competition show "Top Chef All-Stars," which he won more than two years ago.

Blais, a marathon runner and soccer fan, was born in Uniondale, New York and now lives in Atlanta where he owns The Spence and several other restaurants.

The classically trained chef spoke to Reuters about his reputation as a molecular chef, cooking for his family and being a celebrity.

Q: Is there a misconception about your cooking?

A: My food has gotten a rap that it's really overly complicated, scientific, tech-driven. That's not necessarily the case. I cook simple food at home. People could buy the book and cook from it, not just look at the pretty pictures. It's not just about showcasing the food at the restaurant but also the simple food we make every day as well.

Q: How would you describe your cuisine?

A: My food is generally modern American. We take joy in interpreting classic food. The cookbook might take a beef goulash or a roast chicken or pizzas broken down in different ways. We like to take common comfortable American dishes and reinvent them or re-imagine them.

Q: Are there recipes in your book aimed at people who watched you cooking with liquid nitrogen and immersion circulators on television?

A: Those recipes are in the book as well. They are there to take a dish to the next step. We definitely want to put that style and those techniques in the book. We want to educate more people about those techniques and show them how they are applicable for the home cook.

Q: What specific points or techniques do you want readers to learn from your book?

A: Hopefully the book teaches them to cook a little better ... But the main thing is that cooking should be fun. It's an adventure. It's OK to make mistakes. Hopefully it opens up people's minds to have more fun in the kitchen and be more creative.

Q: What do you cook for your family?

A: We roast chickens. We do make a lot of pasta at home. We eat simple food whether it's a bowl of salad or a grilled cheese sandwich. Even though I'm a chef, we eat like most American families do.

Q: Do you find it interesting that you might be better known than some of your mentors like Thomas Keller and Daniel Boulud because of television?

A: It is funny to me, for sure. These are my personal heroes and two of my personal mentors, chefs who are much more experienced, wiser and better. That's one part that's scary and also crazy to me.

Q: What advice do you have for aspiring chefs?

A: Make sure you love cooking and feeding people and keeping them happy. It took me 10 years before I popped up on a television show. It was 10 years of six-day work weeks and 16-hour days, doing some of the lowest level work, peeling potatoes and chopping vegetables. If you are in it just to be on a TV show or just to get some popularity because you cook, it's probably not a right choice you made for your career.

Q: But there might be those who look to you and others and think being on television is a good shortcut to achieve success.

A: Most of us who have been on the show 'Top Chef' have been accomplishing things before we got the call to be on a television show. Keep sending in applications. Go for it. Most of the chefs on my team are constantly sending out applications and answering casting calls for various shows. I recommend it. But make sure you are in the industry because you love to cook. For me, tomorrow if there is no more book and no more TV, I'll still be cooking and that'll make me happy.

Potato chip omelet (serves 4)

12 large eggs

3 tablespoons heavy cream

1/2 teaspoon freshly ground white pepper

1 tablespoon finely chopped fresh flat-leaf parsley

1 tablespoon minced fresh chives

6 cups plain kettle-cooked potato chips

2 tablespoons unsalted butter or vegetable oil

1. Preheat the oven to 375 degree Fahrenheit. In a large bowl, whisk the eggs, cream, white pepper, parsley, and chives together until combined. Fold in the potato chips until they are completely covered in the egg mixture, but try not to crush the chips too much. Let stand for 10 minutes, until the chips soften slightly.

2. Heat the butter in an over-proof 12-inch non-stick skillet over medium-high heat, swirling the pan to coat the bottom completely, until very hot. Carefully pour in the egg mixture and spread it evenly in the pan, then immediately reduce the heat to low. Cook until the eggs are set and the bottom is light golden, about 15 minutes. If the bottom is golden but the eggs are still runny on the top transfer the skillet to the preheated oven and bake until the eggs are completely set, 3 to 4 minutes.

3. To serve, invert a large flat plate over the pan and flip the pan and the plate to invert the omelet onto the plate. Let stand for at least 5 minutes before cutting into wedges and serving.

(Reporting by Richard Leong; Editing by Patricia Reaney and Eric Walsh)

[More from BGR: ]

This article was

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's budget enforcer says tough spending decisions loom in the coming weeks but he will deliver a new round of cuts on time, the latest test of the government's austerity plan to fix the country's economy.

Danny Alexander, the number two at Britain's finance ministry, is charged with securing 11.5 billion pounds of budget savings for the 2015-16 fiscal year by June 26.

So far, Alexander and George Osborne, the chancellor, have won agreements for 20 percent of the total target from seven departments. That's more than any past spending review has managed by this stage, they say.

But some investors have wondered if the signs of resistance, chiefly at Britain's defence and interior ministries, means the target could be missed, or whether the Treasury might have to resort to raising taxes to plug a shortfall.

"There is no question of that," Alexander told Reuters. "We will find the 11.5 billion pounds that we have set out to find from departmental spending reductions ... It's not about whether we can find the savings, it's about how we find them."

Next week, ministers who have so far not signed up for cuts to their budgets will come under new pressure when a cabinet-level spending committee begins poring over the 2015-16 cuts.

A similar approach to Britain's last spending review helped break down resistance and Alexander expects that, again, no minister would want to undergo individual scrutiny by peers.

"In 2010 every department in the end decided to settle with me and with the chancellor and I suspect that will be the way that people choose to go about their business again," he said in an interview on Thursday.

Alexander played down protests from some cabinet members who are unhappy at the size of the proposed cuts in their budgets.

"I don't think it helps them to make that view in public. It certainly doesn't make much impact on me," he said, adding talks so far had been "very positive and businesslike."

BALANCING ACT

Alexander, as chief secretary to the Treasury, is one of the most senior Lib Dems in the Conservative-led coalition. He has to tread a fine line between delivering the savings to keep Britain's austerity push on track and avoiding spending cuts that do permanent damage to its economy.

Prior to Britain's May 2010 election, his party had disagreed with the Conservatives on the need to bring down the deficits quickly. However, their position changed once they were in the coalition.

Alexander said more savings could be found in areas such as the "millions and millions of bits of paper floating around the criminal justice system every day" and other public sector practices that would be "laughable" to private businesses, such as myriad phone contracts rather than bigger, cheaper deals.

Of the 11.5 billion pounds of savings sought for 2015-16, at least 5 billion pounds would come from efficiencies, he said.

Britain's focus on austerity has come under fierce criticism from the opposition Labour party. Last week, some of that criticism was echoed by the International Monetary Fund which urged Britain spend more on infrastructure projects immediately to help speed up the country's painfully slow economic recovery.

"We have got the balance right in our spending plans as they are at the moment," Alexander said when asked about the IMF's report, adding the government had already switched ordinary spending into capital spending over the last three years.

He said a longer-term approach by the government to setting out its infrastructure budgets will help deliver savings.

"We are looking at some critical areas of infrastructure, potentially putting in place five-year budgets rather than one year-budgets in the spending round," he said.

Britain's coalition government has previously said it will spend 3 billion pounds more a year on infrastructure from 2015.

Alexander declined to comment on which infrastructure projects might get the green light for public funding in June.

(Editing by Jeremy Gaunt.)

OKLAHOMA CITY (Reuters) - Music stars from across the nation joined forces in Oklahoma on Wednesday in a benefit concert for victims of the deadly tornado that struck the state last week.

Tickets for the "Healing in the Heartland" concert, held at Oklahoma City's roughly 20,000-capacity Chesapeake Arena and broadcast on NBC television, sold out in minutes when they went on sale on Saturday.

It closed with a duet between Oklahoma-born country singer Blake Shelton, who is a judge on NBC singing competition "The Voice," and Grammy winning R&B star Usher. They sang "Home", co-written and recorded by crooner Michael Buble.

The event was broadcast as a telethon to raise funds for the victims of the twister that killed 24 people, including seven children, when it tore through Moore, Oklahoma, and surrounding areas on May 20. It ranked as an EF-5, the most powerful category for tornadoes.

Organizers did not disclose how much money they raised.

Shelton told reporters before the concert that he and his fellow entertainers were committed to helping out.

"People have given so much to us over the years and it's times like this when you can give back," Shelton said. "You have to. It's not a question of will you?' You have to step up."

Other performers in the concert included Reba McEntire, who like Shelton was born in Oklahoma, Ryan Tedder of the band OneRepublic and country singer Miranda Lambert, who is married to Shelton.

(Editing by Alex Dobuzinskis; and John Stonestreet)

BOSTON (AP) -- A Boston church official who claimed in an autobiography that he was a leg-breaker for reputed gangster James "Whitey" Bulger pleaded not guilty Tuesday to charges that he looted the church's assets.

Edward MacKenzie Jr. is the former director of operations at the Boston Society of the New Jerusalem Church, whose members belong to the Swedenborgian denomination. MacKenzie was arrested last week after a grand jury indicted him on charges including racketeering and extortion.

Federal authorities say MacKenzie looted the church of its considerable financial assets through fraud, deceit, extortion, theft and bribery. The church fired MacKenzie earlier this month.

MacKenzie pleaded not guilty Tuesday to all 14 counts against him. He faces a maximum 20-year prison sentence on each count.

"He maintains his innocence," defense attorney Robert Griffin said after MacKenzie's arraignment.

MacKenzie's bail hearing was postponed until June 26 after Griffin, who is new to the case, requested more time.

MacKenzie's book, "Street Soldier: My Life as an Enforcer for Whitey Bulger and the Boston Irish Mob," was published in 2004. That same year, the national Swedenborgian church sued MacKenzie and another church official, alleging they tried to seize control of the Boston church's assets by taking advantage of its mentally disabled minister. The lawsuit was apparently dismissed later that year.

But the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office reached an agreement with the church that required it to hire an independent chief financial officer. The agreement came after members complained that MacKenzie and other new leaders had pushed out old members and put cronies on church boards to try to cash in on church assets.

PARIS, May 29 (Reuters) - Roger Federer was in no mood to hang around as he moved into the third round of the French Open with a 6-2 6-1 6-1 demolition of India's Somdev Devvarman on Wednesday, but his title credentials were barely put to the test in a hopelessly one-sided match.

Federer, chasing a second French Open title, was never put under pressure and ruthlessly exploited his opponent's frailties.

The Swiss did not lose a point against the 188th ranked qualifier until the third game and took the first set in just 23 minutes with two breaks of serve.

The 17-times grand slam winner broke a further three times in both the second and third sets as Devvarman wilted. (Reporting by Toby Davis; editing by Pritha Sarkar)

KYOTO, Japan (Reuters) - Japanese author Haruki Murakami made his first public appearance in his homeland in 18 years on Monday, describing his newest novel, which was an instant-best seller, as a story that takes place in the real world, unlike many of his other novels.

"Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and His Years of Pilgrimage" has attracted positive reviews, with readers spotting familiar Murakami themes such as people bonding through pain.

Publisher Bungeishunju made the rare decision to print 1 million copies within a week of its April release in Japan.

The novel is about a lonely 36-year-old engineer named Tsukuru Tazaki, who embarks on trips in Japan and Finland to overcome his most painful experience - broken friendships.

"Usually things are divided into the real and unreal, but I was wondering how it will be if I bring all of that into the stage of the real world," Murakami told an audience of about 500 fans in Kyoto.

"People get hurt and close their minds, but as time passes, they gradually open up, and they grow as they repeat that. This novel is about growth."

The fans who won a lottery to attend the event were surprised that the 64-year-old, whose fiction is often surreal and who has made a handful of speeches overseas in recent years but none in Japan, was actually speaking to the public.

"I am a fan of his novels but I have never seen him in person nor heard his voice. Is he a normal person?" Hiroko Yamada, 40, asked as she waited for the event to start.

Murakami said he decided to speak in public to honor his friend Hayao Kawai, a psychologist who died in 2007.

"It's not like I get purple dots all over myself when I am in front of many people. I like to go around on the bus and the subway and live a normal life," he joked.

"I want you to think of me like an endangered species - it's fine to look at me from far away, but be careful because I may bite if you come near and talk to me or touch me."

(Editing by Robert Birsel)

DEAR REALLY READY: Although you think you are ready to start dating, your parents will have to make the ultimate decision on when you enter the "dating game." Their decision will most likely be based on whether you have demonstrated the beginnings of emotional maturity.

Here's how: You need to have proven to them you can handle responsibility, carry out school assignments and chores, be honest with them and keep your word. It will also depend upon whether they know the boy in question, and whether he is responsible enough to be trusted with their most precious possession, which is you.

DEAR ABBY: I have been married for 27 years to a man who is a church pastor. We have had to move every six to eight years, partly because he was repeatedly unfaithful. We have gone through his alcoholism, gambling and womanizing, and my two suicide attempts. We have been trying to work things out, but I suspect that he's back to his old ways.

I work part-time, but haven't been able to find a full-time job after our most recent move, so I am financially dependent on him. I have two adult children who don't live near me. Most of the people I know are through the church, and they are all great supporters of my husband.

I feel trapped, and I don't know how to fix my life at this point. Have you any suggestions? -- TRAPPED ON THE EAST COAST

DEAR TRAPPED: You will have to do it in stages. The first should be to talk with a licensed therapist who is not associated with the church. It will help you to clarify your thinking and become more emotionally stabilized.

Next, continue looking for full-time employment. If necessary, start by volunteering. It will help to widen your circle of acquaintances and perhaps lead to a job.

Then, once you are feeling better about yourself, you will be better able to decide what to do about your unhappy marriage.

DEAR ABBY: After being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis last year, I moved 900 miles from home. Shortly after the move, my dog had to be put to sleep. Because of all the stress, my M.S. flared up and I was admitted to the hospital.

After my third day there I was lonely, so I went to the gift shop (the Pink Smock) and bought myself some pretty flowers and knick-knacks as a pick-me-up. While I was paying for them, the ladies behind the counter asked me if I needed a card for the flowers. I explained I was buying them for myself because I was alone.

After I returned to my room, about an hour later more flowers arrived. I thought my mom had sent them to me from afar. The card read: "Feel Better Soon! From the Ladies at the Pink Smock."

Abby, that has to be the most thoughtful thing a stranger has ever done for me, and I wanted to share it. I am so touched! -- RACHEL IN SANFORD, N.C.

DEAR RACHEL: Your letter is an example of what strong medicine an act of kindness can be. I don't know which hospital the Pink Smock is in, but whoever runs it should know what an asset those caring women in the gift shop are. Kudos to them, and I hope you are doing much better now.

Dear Abby is written by Abigail Van Buren, also known as Jeanne Phillips, and was founded by her mother, Pauline Phillips. Write Dear Abby ator P.O. Box 69440, Los Angeles, CA 90069.

What teens need to know about sex, drugs, AIDS and getting along with peers and parents is in "What Every Teen Should Know." Send your name and mailing address, plus check or money order for $7 (U.S. funds) to: Dear Abby, Teen Booklet, P.O. Box 447, Mount Morris, IL 61054-0447. (Shipping and handling are included in the price.)

Embedded in the speech was the larger message: The war on terror, launched in the panicked aftermath of Sept. 11, is finally drawing to a close nearly 12 years after it began. As Obama put it, choosing his words carefully to avoid a whiff of triumph or complacency, We must recognize, however, that the threat has shifted and evolved from the one that came to our shores on 9/11. Now is the time to ask ourselves hard questionsabout the nature of todays threats, and how we should confront them.

Obama repeatedly returned to this theme when talking about drones: As our fight enters a new phase, Americas legitimate claim of self-defense cannot be the end of the discussion. And when wondering aloud if the legal authority that Congress gave George W. Bush after 9/11 needs updating, he said: I intend to engage Congress to determine how we can continue to fight terrorists without keeping America on a perpetual war-time footing.

There is no absolute certainty that the policy changes that Obama hinted at will dramatically alter American national security policy. Drone attacks will continue and, under exceedingly rare circumstances, American citizens may still be targeted abroad. There is no guarantee that more than a handful of prisoners will be repatriated from Guantanamo. And neither the president nor Attorney General Eric Holder has directly repudiated the government legal document that stated that a Fox News reporter, James Rosen, might be vulnerable to prosecution in a leak investigation under the Espionage Act.

This shift in the presidents public rhetoricespecially on dronesmay partly be the result of the changed internal dynamics of his new second-term national security team with John Kerry at State, Chuck Hagel at Defense and John Brennan as CIA director. Or, it could reflect Obamas need to fortify his liberal flank on issues like drones and Guantanamo when he is battling scandal at the IRS and continued skepticism over the administrations response to Benghazi and has invited comparisons to Richard Nixon in his handling of leak investigations.

Whatever its original catalyst, the speech was vintage Obama, including a mock debate with himself over whether more civilians would die in lawless nations like Pakistan if we launched drone attacks or if we depended on more traditional military raids. This was also a speech of a second-term president willing to take political gambles, such as his full-throated defense of global economic aid: Foreign assistance is a tiny fraction of what we spend fighting wars that our assistance might ultimately prevent.

But, ultimately, the biggest risk that Obama took in the speech was to not visibly worry that conservatives would brand him as soft on terror. Harking back to pre-2001 attacks, from the wrenching embassy bombing in Lebanon in 1983 to the 1995 carnage in Oklahoma City, Obama suggested that the scale of the threats that the nation faces today fits more into that pattern than 9/11. Implicit in this comparison was the notion that America did not restrict its liberties or wage worldwide war against such 20th-century threats.

The Obama speechintellectually dense, well-argued and yet hazy in placesserves as a reminder of another president recasting his foreign policy at a moment of national calm rather than crisis. Almost 50 years ago to the day (June 10, 1963), John Kennedy, sobered by the nuclear standoff in the Cuban Missile Crisis,at American University.

While the American University speech contained a major announcement (a unilateral end of nuclear testing by the United States), it is now mostly remembered as pivotal moment in ending the eyeball-to-eyeball brinkmanship that characterized the early decades of the Cold War. What kind of peace do we seek? Kennedy asked rhetorically. Not a Pax American enforced on the world by American weapons of war I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living.

Yes, the Cold War went on for a quarter century after Kennedy invoked peace at American University. But never again did Americans live with the kind of duck-and-cover nuclear war fears that were a nerve-rattling subtext of the early 1960s.

So, too, alas, isolated terrorist attacks will continue to flare up over the decades to come. And drone warfarehopefully under tighter legal controlis going to remain a tool in the American military arsenal.

But Thursday afternoon in Washington, Barack Obama, who was less than 2 years old when JFK spoke at American University, declared that our long war against Islamic terrorists was drawing to a close. And that we could soon return to genuine peacethe kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living.