#123movies #fmovies #putlocker #gomovies #solarmovie #soap2day Watch Full Movie Online Free – The incredible true story of Marie Sklodowska-Curie and her Nobel Prize-winning work that changed the world.
Plot: The story of Nobel Prize winner Marie Curie and her extraordinary scientific discoveries—through the prism of her marriage to husband Pierre—and the seismic and transformative effects their discovery of radium had on the 20th century.
Smart Tags: #scientist #physicist #science #physics #chemistry #nobel_prize_winner #discovery #radioactivity #radiation #polonium #chemical_element #radium #marriage #hospital #cancer #nurse #female_nudity #adultery #arrogance #pride #genius
|6.2/10 Votes: 9,659|
|6.4 Votes: 326 Popularity: 14.854|
‘Radioactive’ doesn’t know what it wants to be – a biopic, a period drama, or a feminist meditation on the role of women in male-dominated fields – and while it is possible for a film to be all three, sadly this fragile script cannot juggle all of these successfully. What audiences are left with is yet another half-assed biopic that will be buried deep in Amazon Prime’s streaming library, and rightfully so. The memory of one of the greatest women in science – and Rosamund Pike, for that matter – deserve far better than that.
– Ashley Teresa
Read Ashley’s full article…
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
So, a little bit about me first: I was always a man of science. I have a Masters degree in Electronics and Telecommunications Engineering, and I was always fascinated by how things truly work. On the other hand, I’m not the biggest fan of biographical movies due to the genre’s boundaries. These films often follow a generic script, filled with formulaic plot points and lacking imaginative storytelling. Therefore, I usually analyze these movies based on a single question: “do I know more about the character and/or the story that made him/her famous now that I’ve watched this flick?” Another aspect that’s important in any film, but even more in this genre: the actor who interprets the protagonist.
Radioactive possesses Rosamund Pike as the magnificent Marie Curie. If there’s one undeniably incredible element in this feature, it’s Pike’s brilliant performance as the famous scientist. Now, I have no idea how Marie was as a person, so I can’t really evaluate Pike’s display regarding how accurate she is on a personal level. Nevertheless, her impressive emotional range can easily get her a few nominations when the awards season comes around. When it comes to which expressions to use or how strong her emotions need to be, Pike manages to always choose the most coherent option having in mind the character she portrays.
Sam Riley shares great chemistry with Pike, delivering a couple of genuinely passionate moments and witty conversations. Anya Taylor-Joy (Irène Curie), who I forgot was also in the movie, is always a delight to see on screen and, in this case, a very welcome surprise. However, this film is so focused on its protagonist (as it should be), that every character and actor other than the main one ends up being utterly forgettable (nothing wrong with this). Technically, I need to praise the makeup artists, who did a terrific job getting Pike older throughout the runtime, as time flows accordingly. Evgueni and Sacha Galperine’s score is simple yet sweet enough to slightly elevate a few sequences.
Unfortunately, Radioactive holds more than just a few minor issues. My biggest gripe is related to how everything is put together. I doubt most people will watch this movie with the hope of seeing more of Marie Curie’s personal relationships. This isn’t exactly a romantic drama. Having in mind the discoveries that she made, I was extremely interested in watching how, in fact, she discovered radioactivity. Of course, I’m not expecting the film to turn into a highly detailed chemistry lesson and all of its specifics. But Marjane Satrapi rushes through most of the relevant moments or skips them entirely. Marie’s first groundbreaking result is so casually presented to the viewer that it makes the whole thing far from being a big deal (which it is).
There are a couple of visually captivating animated sequences that sort of explain the process that the characters are going to perform, but it’s still quite underwhelming and disappointing. I still have dozens of questions now, which I hoped the movie would answer but didn’t. It’s also edited (Stéphane Roche) in such an uneasy manner that it feels like I’m watching two completely different films. I don’t know if this was Satrapi or Jack Thorne’s (screenwriter) idea, but showing (mostly adverse) future events directly related to Marie’s discoveries didn’t work for me at all. You know how these movies tend to have some sort of information shown before credits explaining how things worked out in real-life? It’s like they picked them up and randomly spread them across the film.
The focus went full-on to the protagonist’s personal life instead of balancing it with her world-changing experiments. Answering my question above, I did learn more about Marie Curie, but not about what I wished to know about her. Ultimately, it feels like this biographical work doesn’t honor her legacy. Just as an example, the story brushes over her discoveries so fast that it doesn’t even explain the reasons behind the nomenclature of the new elements. Overall, it’s not worthy of being the biography of the scientist’s life.
Radioactive boasts an absolutely outstanding Rosamund Pike as the great Marie Curie, but Marjane Satrapi (director), Jack Thorne (screenwriter), and Stéphane Roche (film editor) fail to deliver a well-structured narrative, rushing through the scientist’s groundbreaking discoveries and experiments or ignoring them altogether. Randomly mixing up future catastrophes with the actual story not only breaks both the tone and pacing of the movie, but it also makes the whole viewing a bit uneasy. Despite her personal life always being a point of interest, her work and how she performed it are why most people want to watch this film. To learn more about her contributions to the world of today. Unfortunately, Curie’s legacy is remitted to a by-the-numbers biographical work, restricted by the genre’s formulaic tropes. A neat score by the Galperine brothers and a couple of visually captivating animated sequences still elevate an overall disappointing feature…
doesn’t quite capture the impact
Greetings again from the darkness. There can never be enough movies made or books written about remarkable people with incredible accomplishments. Marie Curie was certainly a remarkable woman and her accomplishments were such scientific break-throughs that we are still using them today. Director Marjane Satrapi’s (Oscar nominated for PERSEPOLIS, 2007) film is based on the 2010 book “Radioactive: Marie & Pierre Curie: A Tale of Love and Fallout” by Lauren Redniss, and the screenplay was adapted by Jack Thorne (THE AERONAUTS, 2019).
The film opens in 1934 Paris, and we see an enfeebled Marie Curie (Rosamund Pike) collapse and get rushed to hospital – a sequence used by director Satrapi as a framing device. The film quickly flashes back to 1893 when a headstrong and brilliant twenty-something Marie Salomea Sklodowska gets kicked out of her laboratory for being … well … a bit too headstrong for the times. Soon she meets an equally headstrong and also brilliant scientist named Pierre Curie (Sam Riley). Pierre recognizes the potential if they combine forces, while Marie initially demands her independence, having never found another scientist worthy of the efforts required for collaboration.
The initial flirtations between brainy scientists is as clumsy and awkward as one might expect. In general, the film struggles with how to best address Curie’s personal life with her professional life and the challenges she faced as a brilliant woman in an era when male scientists didn’t much appreciate a woman scientist telling them they have “misunderstood the atom”, as she and her husband announce the discovery of not one, but two new elements: radium and polonium. Romance and science and equality are a lot for one film to tackle, and this one flounders a bit.
As the film and science progress, director Satrapi intersperses flash-forward vignettes to show how Curie’s discovery of radioactivity is used in the future for both good and not so good. These dropped-in segments include cancer treatment for a little boy in 1957, the Enola Gay bombing Hiroshima in 1945, the Atomic Bomb test in 1961 Nevada, and of course, the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. The segments aren’t always a smooth transition from Curie’s story, but they make the point of how scientists don’t always have control over how their discoveries are applied. There is even a scene where Pierre shows Marie some comical uses entrepreneurs found of trying to capitalize on their discovery, and how their work might factor in to everyday life.
As a biography or profile of Marie Curie’s life and accomplishments, the film hits the high notes, though we do wish it dug a bit deeper. The gender prejudices of the times are somewhat underplayed, and even Marie herself claims lack of funds and the fact that she wasn’t a natural born Parisian held her back more than the roadblocks she faced as a female scientist. It would seem reasonable that those issues were likely tied together and should not be separated. She lashes out at Pierre regarding the Nobel committee initially keeping her name off the submission, but of course this anger is misplaced, as Pierre demanded she be included.
The historical aspect of her winning two Nobel Prizes is not treated as the astonishing accomplishment it is, but time is spent on a personal scandal that occurred after Pierre’s death. We do see Marie sleeping with a sample of her radioactive uranium, and watch her slow physical deterioration, including an incessant cough and damaged skin. Late in the film, Anya Taylor-Joy plays her daughter Irene, and we see the two of them head onto the battlefield to provide mobile x-ray devices for injured soldiers. The Curie family tree is filled with renowned scientists (Irene and her husband Frederick jointly won the Nobel Prize in 1935 for artificial radioactivity), and some of these discoveries literally changed the world – including cancer treatments. Perhaps it’s unrealistic to expect any movie to capture the historical importance of Marie Curie, but we are somehow left feeling she deserved better.
Good bit misdirected.
The movie is ok. Actors are great and the science part of the story, though they don’t show much. BUT for some reason it cuts to the future (multiple times) to the a bomb drop and Chernobyl but it fails to show the governments and companies involved, so sort of implies Madame Curie is reasonable for those events. Which is ridiculous. It’s like saying Newton is responsible for all plane crashes because he discovered Gravity!
Original Language en
Runtime 1 hr 49 min (109 min)
Genre Biography, Drama, Romance
Director Marjane Satrapi
Writer Jack Thorne (screenplay by), Lauren Redniss (based on the book by)
Actors Rosamund Pike, Yvette Feuer, Mirjam Novak, Ralph Berkin
Country UK, France, USA, China, Hungary
Awards 1 nomination.
Production Company StudioCanal, Working Title Films
Sound Mix N/A
Aspect Ratio 2.39 : 1
Film Length N/A
Negative Format N/A
Cinematographic Process N/A
Printed Film Format Digital (Digital Cinema Package DCP)