ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

Elizabeth Debicki

7.01 Running It Back in TENET

by Leave a Comment

We’re so excited to be back with the first episode of our 7th season (or is it the 7th episode of our 1st season?) as we talk about Christopher Nolan’s latest thriller, TENET which tells the story of The Protagonist (John David Washington), a time-bending secret agent charged with stopping a futuristic terrorist from destroying the universe.

With the theatrical system in shambles due to the pandemic, TENET was expected to ‘save the box office’ yet it hasn’t quite lived up to the hype financially. Is it really due to concerns over safety? Or was it merely the wrong film at the wrong time? In this 1on1, we’re thrilled to have back the host of Face2FaceLive.ca David Peck to talk about that issue as well as debate whether or not we think Nolan’s film believes in free will.

You can also stream the episode above on podomatic, Alexa (via Stitcher), Spotify or Soundcloud! Or, you can download the ep on Apple Podcasts or Google Play!

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

7.01 TenetDownload

Note: For those interested in the link to Alissa Wilkinson’s Vox article regarding the Sator Square, click here.

Tenet: I am the [Protagonist] of My Fate

by Leave a Comment

It takes a lot for a director to become a brand unto themselves.

Having made some of the biggest blockbusters of the last two decades, writer/director Christopher Nolan continues to create ambitious worlds that also look to maintain depth to their stories. With the release of his latest epic adventure Tenet, Nolan offers all of the originality and spectacle that fans of his are looking for in their films. 

As the world [slowly] moves back to the multiplex after the global pandemic, the scope of Tenet alone earns the right to be the first major blockbuster to be seen in cinemas. Though the cast does a solid job embracing the script (especially villain Kenneth Branaugh, who positively snarls onscreen), what audiences will appreciate most are the film’s excellently orchestrated set pieces. Rumoured to have used less than 300 digital effects—most blockbusters today usually use thousands per film—Tenet is a visual treat that dazzles the eye. Through his use of inverted time, Nolan creates something so unique that it will demand repeat viewings. Though the narrative is incredibly high concept, it also moves and operates well within the rules for the world that it creates (which is vital for any film about time travel). While admittedly the dialogue can suffer at times due to muffled sound and an overpowering soundtrack (think Bane from Dark Knight Rises), the film always demands your attention and is an entertaining ride from start to finish (and back to start again).

Tenet follows an unnamed secret agent (John David Washington) who is literally referred to as ‘the Protagonist’. After thwarting a terrorist bombing, The Protagonist is enlisted by the Tenet organization, a covert government group committed to stopping World War III. During his training, he learns that fragments from the future have been discovered by terrorists in the present, allowing them to create inverted time loops which threaten to unravel the fabric of all reality. Teaming up with his new partner, Neil (Robert Pattinson), The Protagonist sets off on a mission to retrieve the fragments in order to save the both the present world and time itself.

Though Tenet is drawing comparisons to Nolan’s other mind-bending original, Inception, in truth the film is a natural progression for him over the course of his career. From Memento to Interstellar, Nolan has always been interested in the way that we perceive time and its impact on how we understand the world. (In fact, through its fractured narrative and varying portrayals of time, even his historical WWI epic Dunkirk played with this notion as well.) In Tenet though, Nolan really dives into the concept of time looping and its effect on the fate of mankind. Though he tells his story in a linear manner, there is enough interplay backwards and forwards to bend minds (and, yes, cause some confusion at times).

Like Nolan’s boldest projects, Tenet is also rooted deeply in philosophy. Echoing projects like Interstellar and Batman Begins, he uses this film as an opportunity to explore man’s role in the universe. Initially locked in his own perceptions of reality, Tenet’s Protagonist is a man who realizes that he needs to change the way he understands the world in order to have an impact upon it. His experience with the Tenet Organization not only loosens the underpinnings of his knowledge of reality but forces him to re-examine what can ultimately be changed, even when it has ‘already happened’. [Warning: Minor Spoilers ahead] In this regard, it’s interesting that the film attempts to bring the element of faith as The Protagonist moves forward within his timeline. Despite the fact that what ‘is’ remains ultimately unchangeable, there’s a certain element of hope in the future that Nolan clings to in this film. However, instead of having confidence in some greater power, The Protagonist is challenged to put his faith in the physical realm. (“Have faith in the natural order,” Pattinson’s Neil reminds.) [Minor Spoilers End] 

Interestingly, Nolan appears to have a sense of hope in the linear nature of time. Whereas Memento spoke of clinging to the past, Tenet leans into the idea that new perspectives help provide light in the future. Though the fate of the world may be predetermined, Nolan emphasizes the importance of the individual and their actions in what is to be. (In this way, while never quoted directly, the film almost feels like an homage to Henley’s famed poem Invictus which says, “It matters not how straight the gate… I am the captain of my fate. I am the master of my soul.”) As a result, Tenet argues that, while unchangeable, the role of The Protagonist continues to matter due to the fact that it remains unknown to them.

In the end, Tenet serves as a suitable next chapter in Nolan’s ever-growing catalogue of complex puzzles that both satisfy the eyes and challenge the mind. Through his use of linear time looping, the famed writer/director wants desperately to explore not just the nature of the universe but man’s place and responsibilities within it. More importantly though, even if one has no interest in exploring the complex philosophy that holds the film together, Tenet’s stunning visuals and action-heavy story should also thoroughly entertain audiences as well.

Especially when it’s seen in a theatre.

Tenet is in Canadian theatres now and premieres in US markets on September 4th, 2020. 

5.05 The Roar of the WIDOWS

by Leave a Comment

When four men are killed on a failed bank heist, their widows are drawn into the criminal underworld to complete the job. Featuring an all-star cast, Steve McQueen’s WIDOWS is a gripping tale of betrayal, courage and power… but why isn’t it making any money? This week, Steve welcomes Julie and Paul Levac to talk about the strength of women and the truth behind the lies.

You can also stream the episode above on podomatic or on Spotify! Or, you can download the ep on Apple Podcasts, Google Play or more!

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

5.05 Widows

Thanks Julie and Paul for joining us!

Widows: When Lionesses Roar

by Leave a Comment

What happens when those that are left behind are forced to clean up the mess of those that have left us?

Directed by Steve McQueen, Widows tells the story of a police shootout that leaves four thieves dead during an explosive armed robbery attempt in Chicago. Their widows — Veronica (Viola Davis), Linda (Michelle Rodriguez), Alice (Elizabeth Debicki) and Belle (Cynthia Erivo) — have nothing in common except a debt left behind by their spouses’ criminal activities. Hoping to forge a future on their own terms, Veronica joins forces with the other three women to pull off a heist that her husband was planning.

Though Oscar-winner McQueen is best known for slower paced dramatic fare such as 12 Years A Slave or Shame, he brings a surprising depth to a film which could otherwise dwell in the sub-basement of pulp action films. Co-writing the script with acclaimed author Gillian Flynn (Gone Girl), McQueen’s thriller proves to be both gripping and engaging from the outset. Though on paper some may liken the film to this year’s ‘other female heist film’, Ocean’s 8, thankfully the comparisons end there. Widows is a smart, energetic thriller that makes use of an extremely talented cast led with ferocity by Oscar-winner, Viola Davis.

A tight, well-written thrill ride, what is most interesting about a film such as Widows is where it falls in the cultural spectrum. As female-led films have finally begun to be recognized for their success, there seems to have been a theme building momentum where women are encouraged to ‘find their voice’. Recent films such as A Star is Born, The Hate U Give to, yes, Ocean’s 8 have all provided opportunity for women to offer their stories in a male-driven culture. However, if these films serve as cries from the desert, Widows roars like a proud lioness. There is a beautiful but wild energy permeating Widows that reveals the strength, courage and power that women can wield when caught in a world dominated by male-oppression. When we first meet our leads, their identities are tied closely to the men that they love (especially Veronica). However, when threatened by mob boss Jamal Manning to recover the money that their husbands stole from him, they are forced to learn who they are apart from their spouses.

As a result, there is a complexity to these women as they both grieve the loss of their loved ones yet also begin to step out into the light and discover who they are.

From Davis to Debicki (in what may be her breakout role), each female character finds different ways to stand-up against the emotional and physical barriers that have been placed on them by men misusing their power and authority. (With this in mind, it’s no accident that Davis’ Veronica growls that ‘no one thinks [they] have the balls to pull this off.’) Although they find themselves trapped in a ‘man’s game’, these widows prove that their identity and inner strength aren’t decided by a man’s world.

Armed with a whip-smart script and excellent cast, Widows is a film that will surprise you with its depth and emotional punch. Though more popcorn flick than Oscar-fare, the film shows the power of discovering who you are when you’re forced to start over.

Widows is in theatres now.

Chasing the Truth: 1on1 with Chanya Button (VITA AND VIRGINIA)

by Leave a Comment

Directed by Chanya Button, Vita and Virginia tells the story of the passionate love affair between iconic authors Vita Sackville-West (Gemma Arterton) and Virginia Woolf (Elizabeth Debicki). Through her unique vision, the film explores not only the impact of these women as writers, but their progressive feminist voices as well. Having loved the works of Virginia Woolf since her youth, Button argues that there is much for a story like this to say in our current cultural climate. As a result, in many ways, she feels that the lives of these women projected contemporary values and ideas.

“I think the past has a lot to teach us about the future, especially at a time sort of globally, politically, where we’re really uncertain about [things]…,” she believes. “I think the past has a lot to teach us about the future. That’s not why I made Vita and Virginia but my love of literature and history makes me believe that the past can tell us a lot about the future. Also, it’s a film set in the 1920s, but Vita and Virginia lead lives that would be progressive even for now. They were both married and their marriages were incredibly open and supportive. Their husbands were incredible men… who never held their wives back from anything personally, professionally, [or] romantically. They were enormously progressive about gender and sexuality and art. So, [the film is] set in the 1920s, but it feels like a very progressive subject matter for me. They were such unconventional women and they had such an unconventional relationship [that] I knew I would need to approach the film in a very unconventional way to be true to the sort of the spirit of that.”

One manner in which these women were unconventional for their time is revealed through their views on masculinity and femininity. With views that on gender equality that were extremely progressive, the women found genuine energy from each other that fed their creativity.

“What Virginia understood was that your essential self can have both masculine and feminine qualities. Vita enacted that in her life by having relationships with both men and women. I think she had a sexual appetite and approach to romance that was more stereotypically male in that she would pursue and conquer mainly women, sometimes men. I think our film explores that too. There is masculine and feminine in everyone and I think our film has a very specific approach to vulnerability. That’s one of the reasons I wanted to make the film as well because it’s a film about Virginia who is a person who was treated by her community and by the outside world as someone who was incredibly fragile because of the struggles she had because of [her] emotional, psychological challenges. Whereas actually this relationship which everybody presumed would really overwhelm, her own creative genius came to her rescue and she wrote this novel as a way of sort of digesting and conquering this experience. In a way, it’s a film as well about a woman’s heart and mind and soul and the creative genius rescuing herself from what is a very universal experience, which is a very sort of intoxicating love affair that isn’t going well.”

In development of the film, Button was as thorough as possible in her research, making sure to get the support of the families involved. However, she also feels that there’s a subjectivity to the film that makes it exciting for her.

“I was really, really keen to bring our own response to it,” Button explains. “I think what’s different is that it’s mine, Gemma and Elizabeth’s version of this story. It’s a really expressionistic piece. Judith Nicholson (Vita Sackville-Wests granddaughter) and Viriginia Nicholson (Vanessa Bell’s—Virginia Woolf’s sister—granddaughter) have been incredibly supportive of the film and our research was very respectful and detailed. So, it had their blessing, which was very. But it’s also our response to it. It is in itself expressionistic. I love that none of our actors look exactly like them or sound exactly like them. I wanted to take these actors who are so wonderful and it’s their approach. It’s what we can know about Virginia Woolf and Vita Sackville-West from their writings, their letters, their work, their families, mixed with Gemma’s voice and Elizabeth’s voice.”

As is the case in any biography, there is a balance between truth and fiction within the film. Regarding this balance, Button argues that there is only so much that one can understand about a person given the information available.

“In a way that film’s got sort of this amazing kind of meta thing going on where it is a film with a biographical leaning about Virginia writing a sort of non-biography of Vita. If you looked at my text messages today and said what I was saying to everyone, you would go to certain picture of what’s going on in my life in your mind that might not be true exactly what’s going on. So, letters and writings are only fragments that suggest what’s going on so we can’t know exactly. I was very aware of that making the film in a quite liberating way because we’re saying that we will do this extensive research and be as authentic as we can, but… I think biography is fascinating. You can chase the truth, but you can never know it.”

In our current cultural climate, Vita and Virginia continues the growing trend of allowing the opportunity for different voices to speak to the masses. According to Button, it’s stirring to be a part of something on a broad scale that is opening the door for others to find their voice.

“I think it’s really exciting because, as filmmakers, we can often feel really isolated from each other,” she states. “Actors know more about directors than directors [know about each other] because they work with more of them. We can feel really isolated from each other, so I think it’s really exciting [for there to be] a wind where we’re all going in the same direction. That’s really cool. I think it’s really exciting. I think it does have an overlap with a kind of political conversation where we’re talking about how can we open up the spectrum and hear different voices.”

“I think there absolutely is that sense of finding a voice [within the film] but I think that, in the case of Vita and Virginia, these women have found their voices. There’s nothing adolescent about them. There’s nothing pubescent about them. It’s not coming of age anything. These women are of age and I think more films should be made about women of age. I see a lot of kind of younger women on screen and I think that’s brilliant too. You’re either pubescent or you’re an elderly sage–sort of Yoda–and there’s a lot that goes on in between I think. These women aren’t finding their voices, but they’re being heard. We’re listening to them for the first time. They are heard by their husbands in the film. They’re heard by their communities in the film. They’re making brilliant work that people think is fantastic. So I’ve tried to make film where they’re not finding their voices. They know them. They’re listening to each other. They’re listened to within their worlds and it’s us who’s listening to them for the first time.”

In light of this, as a woman director, Button is also thrilled at the opportunity to have a chance to speak her own voice through film as well. Nevertheless, she also maintains that her motivation remains her desire to offer a different perspective as opposed to any direct political agenda.

“I think the kind of the work is very separate from the movement,” she reflects. “I think it’s really important that I keep that very much in the front of my mind. I think I wouldn’t make good films if I cooked up an agenda and then tried to make films that chase that agenda. In my mind I keep things very, very separate. There’s an intersection because I’m interested in a female perspective on life… What I’d like to do is make films that offer a different perspective, whether that’s a female perspective, whether that’s has to do with class or race or whatever. I think we’ve talked a lot about the male gaze and I think we’ve talked less about the female gaze. I’d like to make films that have a female gaze because I don’t know what it is. I’d like to make something that tries to look for it. but there’s not an agenda. Both things really interest me and, in my mind, I keep them very separate. I enjoy having conversations about it, but it’s not why I’m on set.”

Vita and Virginia premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival.

History’s Voice: 1on1 with Gemma Arterton and Elizabeth Debicki (VITA AND VIRGINIA)

by Leave a Comment

Set in 1922, Vita and Virginia tells the story of the passionate love affair between iconic authors Vita Sackville-West (Gemma Arterton) and Virginia Woolf (Elizabeth Debicki). Though happily married, Vita is as well-known for her sexual dalliances with women as she is for her wealth and written work. When she is invited to meet Virginia, Vita is ecstatic and becomes infatuated with the notion of seducing her.

Based on the play written by Eileen Atkins (who also wrote the screenplay), Vita and Virginia explores not only their impact as writers, but their progressive feminist voices as well. As a result, when the opportunity came up to portray a ground-breaking woman like Virginia Woolf, actress Elizabeth Debicki jumped at the chance.

“I first read Virginia Woolf when I was 17, when I was an acting school,” Debicki recalls. “The first thing I read was A Room Of One’s Own. I used to have to take the train for almost an hour each way to school and I have very distinct memories of reading on the train. And I read it a lot too. It’s a tiny book. So I read it quite a few times. I found it seminal. When I think back to it, it really changed a lot of my thinking about independence. I read To The Lighthouse at some point and didn’t keep under my pillow or anything. Then, when Chanya asked me to play this, I locked myself up in an attic room and read everything like a mad woman. So, that was my relationship with them.”

“I wish I [had been] a progressive 17-year-old feminist woman that read Virginia Woolf,” Arterton responds emphatically. “I didn’t even know about Virginia Woolf. I came from a background [that wasn’t very academic]. So, it wasn’t until Eileen Atkins handed me the script that I started reading about Virginia and Vita and then I just read everything. I think that Mrs. Dalloway is one of the most perfect pieces of writing ever. At the time, Vita was the more successful writer. She was a best-selling writer and, though was known for her romantic trysts, she was an okay writer. She completely idolized Virginia and thought she was a genius. I think something in Vita and Virginia and Orlando is this wanting to be better than they are… I tried to read Vita’s work with the same sort of gusto. I feel like Vito really excelled in her letters because she was a very passionate, seductive and direct. Their letter writing is much more fun to read.”

With this in mind, in any attempt to bring two such essential literary icons to the screen, it becomes imperative to perfect their use of language. Despite having access to their numerous letters to one another, one of the greatest challenges for Arterton and Debicki was giving life to the heightened nature of the dialogue

“It was kind of interesting because the play that Eileen Atkins wrote is the letters. It’s practically verbatim based on the letters,” Arterton begins. “Then she wrote the screenplay and there were still huge fragments of letters in there, but actually we sort of broke it down a little bit, mixed them up and worked it more into dialogue. The script is very heightened I think. One of the challenges that scared me about it—and made me want to try to do it—was that it read like a play on film It almost reads like verse… I think that there was this degree with which you had to surrender to it. When you do Shakespeare and [wonder if] Lady Macbeth just comes up with that concept on the spot, you must accept it as an actor in order for your audience to have a chance of accepting that. It was sort of like the accents that we committed to doing. They really did sound and speak like that, but it’s very heightened.”

“I remember one day we were [saying that] this is hard stuff to get your mouth around, even just speaking it, let alone filling it with life and truth,” she continues. “It’s muscular and I loved that. Also, they used their words. I mean, these are two writers. They used their words as weapons, as tools and there’s this one scene where Vita is trying to impress Virginia, and the moment is so gross. I think just speak normally and she might listen to you. You just think, ‘Come on,’ but that’s what they did in their writing.”

Interestingly, for their time, both Vita and Virginia were viewed as incredibly progessive in their views on modern feminism and gender roles. For instance, at one key moment within the film, Virginia is confronted by her husband’s outdated opinion on a woman’s position within the home. According to Arterton and Debicki, this instance reveals the limitations placed on her gender during the time, which Virginia refers to as ‘damaging absolutes’

“He says talking about what the woman needs to do in order to create a successful marriage,” she says, “and the woman should surrender her opportunities and that will then you must be passive and actually you don’t have to be any of those things. You can be all of those. You can be whatever you want and still be feminine, if you would like to label yourself in that way… [Right before that, he said that] the man is the plant. The woman is the soil, which is ultimately means that the woman is there support the man and to nourish the beautiful, great thing that goes out in the world. The woman is just this underneath thing, It doesn’t get any of the glory. No sun. No fun.”

“Damaging absolutes [are] a really interesting concept to pick up on, I think,” Debicki replies. “What I love about these two women, among many things, is that they were so incredibly progressive. They actually didn’t label themselves [neither for] their sexuality, their creative endeavors [nor] how they viewed their marriages. Their husbands didn’t label them or try to box them. They were really progressive… The fact that they [were] publicly together was scandalous. Not only that, it was illegal. To this day, people in the limelight creatively who decide to openly be open about their relationship can suffer from that because people would like them to be absolutely one thing and human beings aren’t. But actually, we often try very hard often to be in order to please people or at least know where to put us.”

Similarly, this view also provided a space where Arterton could connect with her character insofar as she too despises being placed in any sort of specific ‘box’.

“Also, I think that’s the thing that people like to be able to play someone somewhere,” Arterton echoes. “I always get so frustrated as an actor because I think, “No, I’m not that thing that you think I am” That’s why I think we go for these roles. They’re like always very, very different and scary to kind of break out of those things and Vita and Virginia just lived there. They did what they wanted. Vita would go out dressed as a man around London, like the acting game where you pretend to be Irish for the day and go into a shop, but as a man. [laughs]”

Despite the film’s period setting, the film has a definitively modern tone. For Arterton, this youthful vibrance within the piece was deliberate in order to separate it from other more traditional period films.

“We were aware of the period obviously with wardrobe set and… what was happening at that time, but I think sometimes period dramas can feel quite sort of stiff and inaccessible,” she claims. “We wanted this to feel young and I think it does achieve that. I wanted it, we wanted it. It’s made by young women and we wanted it to [reach all the people] that have never read Virginia Woolf or Orlando. We want you to feel inspired to read it after seeing this film. If these people lived now, they’d be like the leading art. They’d be like the kind of crazy punk out there, breaking free. We wanted to show that.”

“Well, I think that people can find Virginia Woolf’s work intimidating because of its density or enclosed but it’s not true,” Debicki argues. “Her work actually opens up to you or is so fluid and so accessible. I think that people could [feel that way about any writer, like] Shakespeare and Chekhov. It’s very easy to form ideas about things you don’t know about. So I mean if this film inspires young women to actually pick up To The Lighthouse and [read it], then that’s a beautiful thing. I just think you can learn so much from her work.”

Vita and Virginia played at the 2018 Toronto International Film Festival.

 

The Cloverfield Paradox: When Action Impacts All

by Leave a Comment

I don’t do horror movies.

I don’t do loud clangs, shrieks, or shadows that jump across the screen. I especially don’t do creepy sci-fi films. Movies that mess with time, reality, or my basic understanding of physics (which is very, very basic) rarely make it to my queue. In all seriousness, George of the Jungle is one of my all-time favorite movies if that says anything about my standards.

So it probably isn’t a shock I’ve not seen the previous Cloverfield films or a single episode of Lost. And yet here I am, contributing today regarding The Cloverfield Paradox, the Netflix release of J.J. Abrams’s newest Cloverfield installment.

Yeah, I don’t know how I got here either. But since I did, let’s roll with it. I’ll keep it spoiler free too…if anything because I’m not exactly sure what I witnessed.

Despite my nonchalant “sure I’ll give it a go” attitude, I was hooked 6 minutes in. With the world on the verge of self-destruction, tensions high across nations due to dwindling energy resources, Ava Hamilton (Gugu Mbatha-Raw is a-mazing) accepts a position on an international mission to do something I can only describe as “mine” energy from space. And it’s a truly international crew, so props to Abrams for bringing together the cast of David Oyelowo (Kiel), Daniel Brühl (Schmidt), Ziyi Zhang (Tam), John Ortiz (Monk), Chris O’Dowd (Mundy), Aksel Hennie (Volkov), Elizabeth Debicki (Jensen), and Roger Davies as Michael. The cast makes this movie.

Of course, things go horribly wrong once they finally harness the needed energy after two years of unsuccessful attempts. Cue lots of banging, fires, and the beginning of creepy things. I admit there might have been a scene or two where I had to close my eyes – the sounds were enough and one scene in particular involved worms. Just… ew. No.

Once the initial “avert my eyes,” scenes cycled, I was sucked right back in. How does Jensen know Hamilton? What is Mundy’s arm up to? Where did the Earth go? Like I mentioned in the beginning, I tend to steer clear of movies that propose alternate realties and concepts such as there is a second Earth, with a second crew, trying to solve for the same problem but within a very different reality. But I was so wrapped up in Hamilton and the crew, I found myself actually engaged.

Now I have seen enough non-jittery science fiction to confidently say that there are plenty of “standard sci-fi movie moments,” like fires, crashes, doors getting stuck, people dying, and “are we losing our minds or is this really happening” conversations. And if you’re an Abrams fan, you’ll also notice his trademark homages to earlier science fiction films, (such as the original Alien movies), his continued exploration of inter-dimensional interactions, and the overall “is this real or not” feeling. So if that combination works for you, I don’t think you’ll be wasting your time if you check it out and move on.

But personally, I kind of sat in an awed state at the conclusion. Not so much because the movie itself was anything spectacular (again, I think the most compelling aspect of it all was the cast), but because I began to consider how my individual actions can affect others.

I’m not versed enough in science to propose any thoughts on the possibility of alternate realities or if my every-day decisions change the fate of another me somewhere across the cosmos. I’m not going that deep here. But I do believe that humanity is designed to crave interaction and relationship, which gives me pause and forces me to think beyond my personal interests and instead about how what I do, what I say, how I act, etc., can impact someone else.

More than likely my actions will never alter the fate of the entire human race. Yet every day I am presented with opportunities to influence the course of any one person’s journey. Not because I have control or am powerful or that persuasive, but because I am a representative of Jesus Christ. How I respond in times of crisis, how I rejoice in times of excitement…even how I greet each person who travels across my path…at any moment what I say or do can be used for help or for harm.

In the book of Matthew, chapter 22, verses 36-40, Jesus is answering the question of “what is the greatest commandment?” To paraphrase, Jesus responds with “love God with everything you have and everything you are, and love others as you love yourself.” For me this means each action I take and each word I speak needs to ladder back up as either loving God or loving others. Even if I don’t “love” the person on the other end of my action, or even know them, I still love God. And my behavior toward that other person is reflective of that love of God.

I’m not saying I have to sit and analyze every detail of my actions and how they might one day a long time from now have a negative impact on some stranger’s life. That’d be practically impossible.  But I am saying that as a Christian, it’s important that I choose my words and actions carefully.