"You have killed God, sir!"

—Thomas Huxley (to Charles Darwin)

While I can find no historical record of the quote by Huxley (Toby Jones), an agnostic biologist and staunch Darwinian crusader, I’m sure many of the era suspected no less. In fact, many of this era continue to suspect no less.

Creationism: Few words have sparked more querulous debate over the last 150 years. So it seems time for a movie about the unassuming man who started it all, to some the original anti-Christ who blasphemed those traditional Victorian assumptions of God’s omnipotence over mankind.

Paul Bettany plays Charles Darwin, settled down in middle age, comfortably landlocked in England decades after his globetrotting adventures aboard the HMS Beagle. He putters in his study and in his backyard, a loving wife (Jennifer Connelly) and a gaggle of children at his side.

Darwin’s youthful adventures emerge primarily in conversations with his eldest daughter, Anne (Martha West), an inquisitive child who shares her father’s excitement in science.

These conversations are told as flashbacks, snippets of visual memory—aboriginal children whisked from their tribe in the guise of research, for example, or the touching observations of human characteristics in a captive orangutan named Jenny—and constitute the highlights of the film. Far more of us equate Darwin with the Galapagos Islands than with a quaint cottage in the English countryside, after all.

An irony here is Bettany’s sterling performance as ship’s surgeon Steven Maturin in 2003’s “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World,” in which the fictitious HMS Surprise lays anchor in the Galapagos, Maturin scouring the islands for strange new creatures to observe.

Unlike “Master and Commander,” “Creation” is a quiet, unassuming biography detailing Darwin’s reluctance to publish his findings. His devout wife, Emma, reminds him, quite often, of his impending damnation in hell.

Contrary to popular belief, Darwin was not out to destroy the notion of God. His long reluctance to publish his work and his apparently guilt-racked poor health seem to indicate that Darwin became almost apoplectic at the idea, despite the pleas of his scientific peers.

Yet similar papers were already being published and scrutinized in Europe; it seems that Darwin’s fame stems from the depth and accuracy of his notes. In 1859, Darwin’s evolutionary (so to speak) tome, “On the Origin of Species,” became an instant best-seller.

“Creation,” however, settles comfortably on neither Darwin’s exploits nor his fame—and trying to find a tie-in between the film’s enticing title and the story itself is a bit daunting.

It is a mildly fascinating tale that frequently bounces back and forth between past and present (the best way of deducing time is in noting Darwin’s hairline)—part historical tale, part gothic nightmare (albeit slightly) and part ghost story.

For history buffs and staunch Darwinians, the film might prove rewarding. (It is a nicely depicted little period piece.) For Bettany fans (and I admit I enjoy the man’s acting) “Creation” may also prove worthwhile, but I suspect most casual filmgoers may come away disappointed.

For both creationists and evolutionists, there’s little to spark ire or loathing—and that, oddly enough, may be this gentle film’s biggest failing.