Marie Curie

Les palmes de M. Schutz (1997)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On TV, November 2020) Unfairly enough, I couldn’t help but compare Les palmes de M. Schutz to 1943’s Hollywood biography Marie Curie with Greer Garson. The comparison isn’t without cause, considering that both are films about the discovery of radium by Marie Curie and her husband Pierre. Curiously enough, I don’t have a clear favourite: the 1943 film is reasonably exact despite having been made in the 1940s, whereas this newest French offering is less faithful to fact, but often funnier, more dramatically diverse, and benefits from switching its focus from the Curies to their academic sponsor, the titular Mr. Schutz. On top of the Curies’ scientific quest (adequately vulgarized through a supporting character), there’s Schutz’s thirst for recognition, even as his own scientific skills are slight—there’s a curiously sympathetic side to his efforts at recognizing, fostering and sheltering talent here that would warm any middle manager’s heart. It does help that none other than Phillipe Noiret plays Schutz, bringing considerable warmth and sympathy to the character. Otherwise, Les palmes de M. Schutz is a very likable film—it’s filled with gentle humour, covers a lot of ground both scientific and personal, and actually gives anyone the impression that they’ve learned a lesson or two about the history of radium. It’s worth a look if science on-screen is the kind of thing that interests you.

Madame Curie (1943)

Madame Curie (1943)

ByChristian Sauvé Movie Review

(On Cable TV, June 2019) The ever-compelling Greer Garson had a remarkable five-year run of Oscar nominations in the early 1940s, and the biographical drama Marie Curie was right in the middle of it, focusing on the scientist’s turn-of-the-century discovery of radium. As befits a 1940s Hollywood production tackling scientific subjects, the emphasis here is on melodramatic sentiments, beautiful romantic black-and-white cinematography and actors mouthing off grandiose statements about science, peering sagely in a long-distant future to extrapolate the meaning of their research. Some of it comes across as silly and overdone, but everything must be put in perspective, and by most standards (including, often, our own), Madame Curie is still quite an admirable movie—it doesn’t soft-pedal either Curie’s femininity (easy enough with Garson in the lead role), the heartwarming loving relationship with her husband (Walter Pidgeon, looking dashing with a sharp-chinned beard), the importance of her discoveries or the effort that goes into actual science. While it does allow itself quite a few moments of unabashed Hollywood romanticism, those more conventional passages work at making the characters likable in addition to illustrating their serious intellectual achievements. The scientific vulgarization is not bad (despite a few shortcuts) and the portrayal of a woman scientist is still remarkable either for 1900, 1943 or 2019. I quite liked it, and I remain surprised that at an age where STEM for girls is rightfully seen an unabashed good, Madame Curie isn’t better known or more widely seen.