Radioactive

There are elements of the film that don't quite hang together but I think once you identify the alternative time lines, this technique works well to show the true impact of Marie Curie's work long after she died.The story is fascinating and the science is detailed enough to keep the more technical viewer engaged but easy enough for everyone to enjoy. The personal side of her life was new to me and the ongoing battle with the male dominated scientific community was well handled and entertaining.Needless to say the acting was excellent and if for nothing else, you should watch it for Rosamund Pike's superb performance.I think the reflective nature of analysing the downside or danger of using radiation is very thought provoking and if this was something she did indeed grapple with during her lifetime then perhaps it is a good thing she did not live to see WWII and beyond. However my only criticism of the scenes where we look forward in time is that they all seemed sinister - even the more positive parts such as treating cancer. I think her contribution to our modern daily lives should be looked at more positively!Very enjoyable, highly recommend it.

Radioactive is a worthy movie, carried very well by Rosamund Pike. Her performance is one of the great recent female roles, even if the director, in her first full feature non-cartoon movie, hasn't done a good job. Mainly because it has too many dreams, too many leaps to the future ill-uses of the radioactivity, too many flashy images and too many digressions. Said director wanted to tell a lot and to explain many things - the sensation she leaves to the spectator is of a mess. Also, about the "morals" of the film, the live of Mme Curie and her scientific career, should have sufficed to fill the two hours without having to make her distantly responsible for Hiroshima and Chernobyl.Otherwise, the early XX Century is well depicted, especially the rigid administration of the university and the gerontocracy's discrimination of women.Another flaw at the core of this movie is that we do not see Mme Curie's scientific struggle nor her vast intellect and titanic will power. All these are very well documented features of the admirable woman, yet the director seems to be more interested in her love life and in nudist afternoon picnics.So all and all, an interesting film that should have been based in the mind, not the body, of one of the more remarkable people of the last 100 years.

I would ask you to make up your own minds and NOT pay great attention to the more 'Radical' review !Maria Curie is almost certainly portrayed as a female of resounding resilience, resolute, challeging force of nature.She carries a vehiment dislike of all things hospital and even the mere proximity's unbearable.Trauma carried over by her experience of watching her own mother die in one.The thing I felt you only receive a minor twinkling of is what inspired this sense of conviction in Marie to Excell herself in science at the expense of all else, perhaps further research around this may resolve this.Pierre is presented as the milder diplomatic and compassionate one who soothes the ambers.Whether this truly portrays the individual characters involves sound research and NOT as an American reviewers points out the use of 'Wikipedia" ( which can be altered by anyones opinion vs facts).The scientific research is crude as that was their primary source available at the time.The historical portrait is real enough and atmospheric enough to engage and imbue the audience with the period and its graphic details of life.The things which disturbed me most was the vial of radioactive Radium/ Palladium Marie carried with her to bed every night and possibly everyday also. The idea of so much radiation exposure would simply never have occurred to them, although later on during their research there is mention of this through press clippings.The other scenes I felt most disturbing are on the fields of battle, with devastation landscapes with smouldering trees and one has an embattled solder embedded in the top most canopy of shredded tree trunks.The directors felt the need to incoroporate a some recent radiation disasters for the viewers to dwell on.Whether this is to ingratiate the viewers directly linking the disastrous effects of radioactivity or to denigrate the Curies research you decide for yourselves.There does seem less visual representation of the success of their research opposed to the disastrous ones.It's a great film well worth watching for sure however just be prepared it's not rose tinted.

The film was very well acted by all involved and was very interesting. However the director made some weird choices. The film effectively stopped with World War One and implied that she died pretty much straight after (although it did say just before the credits she lived until 1934). Those last 16 years were just ignored. The worst bit are the stupid more modern interludes of Hiroshima and Pripyat (the film is so poorly researched it says it's Chernobyl). It could have been a really good film, the director just got their underwear in a twist about things for no good reason. She doesn't direct much and hopefully isn't allowed near talent again.