Summary
On the one hand, let's say that it is one of those typical biopics that tries to cover almost a whole life in less than two hours (with all its schematics and didacticisms), so it fails a bit to give depth to its protagonist and It is a bit short in the development of the scientific aspects of history, so that we also take note of the revolutionary nature of its discovery and its approach.
But the film is also a good gateway to know and appreciate not-so-known aspects of Madame Curie's life and place ourselves in the historical context and understand what it meant to be a lucid, brilliant, independent, defiant and foreign woman in Paris. Of the early twentieth century and the prejudices and even hatred that it mobilized.
Madame Curie is a necessary reminder of how hatred and prejudice are blind and unrewarding. Then and now.
Review
The film is a biopic that covers a fairly wide stretch of the life of the famous researcher and two-time Nobel Prize winner.
Marjane Satrapi directed that animated marvel called Persepolis about a woman and her relationship with macho Iran. This film is not up to her standards, but the feminist imprint, naturally, is once again present in the figure of this scientist who challenged the scientific environment of her time with a revolutionary discovery: that chemical elements could be transmuted (transformed) into other merits. To the emission of radiation.
The film brings together several of the vices and schematics of many biopics: an accelerated pace at the beginning to capture the viewer, the will to condense almost an entire life in less than two hours (in a sort of parade of topics), a protagonist more or less well delineated but does not get to be deepened and a certain didacticism that unfortunately does not place too much emphasis on the scientific aspects of the story (and thus understand the revolutionary nature of its discovery) and that also resorts to a formal resource that shows us the obvious derivations of Curie's discoveries. Her clashes with the French academic and scientific establishment will appear, the struggle to continue with her experiments, the none at the time of the awards.
Among the successes, we have the good performances of Rosamund Pike and Sam Riley as her husband Pierre Curie, certain dreamlike scenes, the reconstruction of the time and the staging of not-so-known aspects of his life such as the challenges to social conventions of the time and others that I prefer not to spoil.
Madame Curie is perhaps, above all, a necessary reminder of what it meant to be a lucid, brilliant, independent, defiant and foreign woman in early 20th century Paris and how hatred and prejudice do not recognize merits and reasons, in that time and no other.
On the one hand, let's say that it is one of those typical biopics that tries to cover almost a whole life in less than two hours (with all its schematics and didacticisms), so it fails a bit to give depth to its protagonist and It is a bit short in the development of the scientific aspects of history, so that we also take note of the revolutionary nature of its discovery and its approach.
But the film is also a good gateway to know and appreciate not-so-known aspects of Madame Curie's life and place ourselves in the historical context and understand what it meant to be a lucid, brilliant, independent, defiant and foreign woman in Paris. Of the early twentieth century and the prejudices and even hatred that it mobilized.
Madame Curie is a necessary reminder of how hatred and prejudice are blind and unrewarding. Then and now.
Review
The film is a biopic that covers a fairly wide stretch of the life of the famous researcher and two-time Nobel Prize winner.
Marjane Satrapi directed that animated marvel called Persepolis about a woman and her relationship with macho Iran. This film is not up to her standards, but the feminist imprint, naturally, is once again present in the figure of this scientist who challenged the scientific environment of her time with a revolutionary discovery: that chemical elements could be transmuted (transformed) into other merits. To the emission of radiation.
The film brings together several of the vices and schematics of many biopics: an accelerated pace at the beginning to capture the viewer, the will to condense almost an entire life in less than two hours (in a sort of parade of topics), a protagonist more or less well delineated but does not get to be deepened and a certain didacticism that unfortunately does not place too much emphasis on the scientific aspects of the story (and thus understand the revolutionary nature of its discovery) and that also resorts to a formal resource that shows us the obvious derivations of Curie's discoveries. Her clashes with the French academic and scientific establishment will appear, the struggle to continue with her experiments, the none at the time of the awards.
Among the successes, we have the good performances of Rosamund Pike and Sam Riley as her husband Pierre Curie, certain dreamlike scenes, the reconstruction of the time and the staging of not-so-known aspects of his life such as the challenges to social conventions of the time and others that I prefer not to spoil.
Madame Curie is perhaps, above all, a necessary reminder of what it meant to be a lucid, brilliant, independent, defiant and foreign woman in early 20th century Paris and how hatred and prejudice do not recognize merits and reasons, in that time and no other.