This movie is critical both of supporters of Intelligent Design, and supporters of evolution, though for very different reasons. It criticizes Intelligent Design proponents of the grounds that their ideas are not science, cannot be investigated with science, and indeed that they do not even understand what evolution by natural selection is. It trenchantly criticizes evolutionary biologists on the grounds that they have ineffectively communicated their science to the wider public.

It seems to me that this movie brings up an important question that goes well beyond evolutionary biology: What is the most effective way to communicate science to a non-scientific audience? In this movie, the technical concept is evolution and the non-scientific audience is the public. But note that an environmental attorney may very well need to explain to a jury computer models of extinction, the toxicology of dioxin or the design of experiments to assess Vioxx safety and efficacy.