Simon Dillon reviews the film

Is Creation the kind of pro-evolution propaganda the likes of Richard Dawkins would want to smash all box office records? On the face of it Dawkins might be disappointed. The filmmakers have insisted this is an honest, fact-based portrayal of the time when Charles Darwin, wracked with grief over the death of his beloved daughter, agonised over whether or not he should publish The Origin of Species. Framed within such a context, director Jon Amiel's film becomes an interesting and personal affair that at least makes a vague concession to people of faith.

For instance, unlike some of his more militant colleagues, Darwin is portrayed as not necessarily thinking the death of religion is a good thing, even though he is gradually losing his own faith, much to the chagrin of his devoutly Christian wife Emma. Told through flashbacks, the story mostly focuses on his troubled relationship with his family as a result of his daughter's tragic death. At the same time, there is much hand-wringing as to whether he should publish his controversial theories as Darwin flirts with perdition to suitably gripping dramatic effect.

Mercifully, one thing this film isn't is boring. John Collee's well-judged screenplay (based on Randal Keynes biography) is imaginative both structurally and as an insight into Darwin's mind. Obviously, there is no way of knowing exactly how accurate this is, but dramatic licence is used to good effect. What really makes Creation worth recommending though is a tour-de-force performance by Paul Bettany in the lead role, and an excellent Jennifer Connelly as his long suffering wife. There is also good support from the likes of Benedict Cumberbatch, Toby Jones and Jeremy Northam. Expect a few Oscar nominations in acting categories if the film manages to get a release in the United States.

Which leads me to the inevitable spiritual section. I still believe in a literal seven day creation with a literal Adam and Eve, and I still believe the Bible says what it means and means what it says. But science should be the pursuit of truth wherever it leads. The problem is that scientists today who dare to suggest anything different to evolutionary theory, or suggest ways in which some of Darwin's theories may have merely been the beginning of something that actually supported the Biblical viewpoint, are routinely silenced. That is not the pursuit of true science, but adherence to an authoritarian dogma no better than the alleged religious dogma that Darwin's followers so vehemently opposed. I'm not going to debate the specifics for or against evolution in the context of this review, but I am going to comment on one particular point that always seems to crop up whenever evolutionists argue their case against intelligent design.

There's a scene about half way through Creation where Darwin and his children go into the forest to observe various animals and come across a fox about to kill a rabbit. When the attack occurs, one of his children cries and begs him to make the fox stop, but Darwin responds as kindly as he can that the fox and its children have to eat to and that this is the natural order of things. I have lost count of the number of times I have heard similar comments from people watching nature documentaries that show animals killing their prey. Typically people think it's horrible, but reassure themselves that it's the natural order of things.

But from a Biblically accurate perspective, it isn't the natural order of things. I get continually frustrated that Christians cannot answer the accusation that nature is cruel (wasps that lay eggs inside caterpillars, the various species of lethal intestinal worm, etc) beyond a patronising "it's not our place to question God's plan". We live in a fallen world, and the animal kingdom was never meant to prey on itself. Before the fall of man, animals were vegetarians and so were people. God gave man permission to eat meat after Noah's flood (not after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden as is commonly believed), but this was not his perfect will. It was a compromise in a fallen world. The Bible promises that one day the natural order as God intended will be restored and the lion will lie down with the lamb. Therefore, it's perfectly natural to be repulsed and/or upset by animals killing one another (and man killing animals for that matter), as witnessing such scenes is a sad reminder of what the sin of man caused. For the record: I am not a vegetarian.

Because Creation fails to present the Christian perspective on this particular point to my satisfaction, and because it is ultimately pro-evolution in its argument, it is still to my mind propaganda. But it's well acted, imaginative and hugely engaging propaganda, and as I've always said, I'd rather be offended than bored. For that reason, and because I think Christians generally need to brush up on their apologetics, I would recommend this film and hope it causes enough debate so Christians are empowered to effectively defend their beliefs.