In the year 2020, in the midst of a pandemic, nothing could be more important than a film about a scientist, and a woman scientist at that, who has made unprecedented strides in her field. But "Radioactive," the true story of Marie Curie and her discovery of polonium, radium, and radioactivity, was made long before COVID became part of our everyday vocabulary. Perhaps because of this, the film does not truly embrace what it means to tell a fascinating story about science and the power it has to instantly change the reality of the world.

Instead, the film, which debuted at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2019 and opened Friday on Amazon Prime, is an all-out romance. Science is Marie's true love, and her husband and business partner Pierre Curie is her lover. Marie, brilliantly played by Rosamund Pike, constantly vacillates between the two passions, and is equally seduced and scorned by both. (It is clear that Marie and Pierre were baited and switched from a science bio-pic to a kind of rom-com as soon as they had their cute encounter in Paris.)

Given that the film, directed by Marjane Satrapi, is an adaptation of Lauren Redonis' 2010 graphic novel Radioactive, it is not too surprising that Radioactive romanticizes Marie's two great loves Not: Marie & Pierre Curie: A Tale of Love and Fallout". And it was the complicated relationship between Marie and Pierre, played by Sam Riley, that attracted Pike to the role.

"The moment Pierre was killed [in a road crossing accident], I was very shocked. I felt very unfamiliar with this structure that you expect in any movie," Pike said. 'I cried. I loved them as a couple. I loved the strangeness of their relationship and I really felt the loss of him."

The chemistry (no pun intended) between Pike and Riley is so strong that his presence is really missed later in the film. But maybe that is the genius of Satrapi."

After all, an epic love story should feel incomplete without one half of the couple.

One of the film's most shocking scenes is when Pierre returns from Sweden with the Nobel Prize for ESP (on behalf of the two of them), and Marie lashes out at Pierre for "stealing her spark." (This heated scene ends with Pierre accusing his wife of "not seeing beyond the end of her nose." ) This exquisite mix of sentiment, bitterness, and wit seems to say the essence of the film: can a woman have it all?

"She had reached her limit. She couldn't do it all. She couldn't be in Sweden right after giving birth, and that irritated her. And she chose to take her anger out on someone else, but in a way, that anger was against the woman herself. She was here to take care of her children. It was a deviation from her true path."

Pike continues: "I think it means I can't be my own person. Because I love you and you came into my life and I have to care about other people. She finds herself in a partnership with her children, which is almost the definition of a 'singular being' because of it all. She loves someone else, and that complicates her life in a variety of directions. If we all didn't have children and didn't have partners, life would be much simpler.

Despite the feminist subtext that underpins the film (at times the imagery may seem heavy-handed, and the film's title is a reference to the "feminist" subtext of the film), the film is not a "feminist" film.

"I think it's a very contemporary argument," Pike says. Marie chose to be a scientist before she was a mother." At that time, being a scientist was a very rare occurrence, and I don't think she was ever criticized for it. Today, we have higher expectations of women's abilities, but at the same time our evaluation of mothers is much stricter than it used to be. The standards that women impose on themselves have become so strict, so frighteningly rigorous."

On one occasion, Pike's son wandered into our interview wanting to know where his mother was. Pike handled this exchange with extraordinary patience, lending the child his phone and answering his questions with humor.

The actress describes Marie Curie as "not the best mother," but it is clear throughout the film that Pike's own experiences as a mother influenced her view of the character. She imbues the scientist with the same patience and longing that Pike shows for her own children, this time against radium.

"Radium was like her child," Pike admits. 'In a way, Radium was the most important birth of her life. You see Marie and Pierre on the floor. That moment is so powerful. It's like when new parents have a baby but haven't told everyone about it yet. That moment when something wonderful and new becomes yours just for a precious moment". [Marie and Pierre were known to have doted on their discovery to the extent that they would sleep with a vial of radium under their pillows and bundle radium around their bodies until they coughed up blood. The scientists' familiarity and comfort with the radioactive element was one of the film's most exhilarating moments.

Unfortunately, however, Satrapi does not give such moments a place to play. She muddles the film with leaps in time as she tries to show the future ramifications of Curie's discovery. Shots of Hiroshima and a sick child undergoing radiation therapy are interspersed with neon-lit dream sequences and serious dialogue, resulting in a number of awkward, laughable moments.

Pike believed that these juxtapositions were important for a "balanced" portrayal of Madame Curie.

"Everything has a shadow. There is no great good without evil, and we cannot understand great power unless we can respect not only its greatness but also its destructive potential."

"Satrapi is very maverick, unpredictable, original, clever and funny. She has a very original way of looking at things. This is going to be an adventure and I wanted to do this woman justice in some way. It may not be to everyone's taste, but I don't intend to make something boring."

It's not boring, but it's not engrossing either. Those expecting a story in which Curie becomes a rad-powered superhero will be disappointed by a somber tale about love and loss. Pike thinks it may have more to do with our modern perceptions of superheroes than with Curie's legacy.

"Why can't Marie Curie be as good a role model as Wonder Woman?" she says. 'I want girls to look at this and think, I could occupy that place. I can change the world like Marie Curie."

Time will tell, or one of Satrapi's flash-forward jump cuts will tell.