Obviously very different films, but just as a recent example (and as one I'll be reviewing shortly), Claire Denis' "35 Shots of Rum," and going back even further, her "I Can't Sleep." Those films intelligently access the tense divide between whites and non-whites (or the immigrants, in the case of "I Can't Sleep").

In "A Prophet," there just isn't enough focus on that cultural rift. Maybe the film should have given some context to the "diaspora of recent social trends in France."

We understand the Arabs are being oppressed by the Corsicans, and Malik learns to read and tries to better his situation. You don't have to like him, but the way the film elevates him you can't deny that it wants you to. And there just isn't enough context for this character to back up that aggrandizement. If anything it's putting a face to that oppression for people who can relate to him to root for, and I can understand your want to do so, but this character never comes to life as his own person.

And again, really, I could look past a lot of that, but that last act revelation/twist/symbolism nonsense, it's just heavy-handed and overwrought. It really spoils a film for me which I think otherwise is inoffensively middle of the road, and I've yet to hear a good argument for its inclusion.

I agree with "Anonymous," although I see this movie more as a depiction of the darker side of the quintessential immigrant (I am one, before I go ahead with what else I have to say). I'm not saying this personally, but some of us have to do questionable things to get ahead.

Also, points for sympathy for Malik bettering himself. He makes the other Arabs realize that there's room for improvement when it comes to their conditions. He also learns how to read and speak a third language. If I was in prison, I'll probably have to shank a guy. In the end, he settles his scores and is hopefully able to leave that behind him. Compared to the scum he shared showers with, he's a fucking angel.

With every revenge plot, you're not supposed to like the protagonist who eviscerates his enemies.

Not the nicest story, but on both accounts it's probably more realistic than the hardworking frontiersman that populate most immigrant narratives.

I hope it wins the Oscar, but your angle on it is what I imagine would be what the Academy might think of it. Worried.

And the prisoners who oppress him are CORSICAN, not French. Which plays on a white subject position that oppresses the non-whites without those oppressors being French themselves, therefore making "French" people seem less accountable. And/or it's a play on how many "white" people in France aren't really "French."

I'm no sociology major, and again I agree with "Anonymous," and I'm saying this in the nicest way possible, but having some context on the diaspora or recent social trends in France might help.

And I don't think that's so outlandish, as I'm sure Audiard is heavily influenced by Bresson, even if he clearly doesn't possess that same, almost indefinable Bressonian quality.

As for the prophet/martyr debate. I read an interview with Audiard where he expressed his interest in making a film in which the hero is an unlikely hero. And I understand how he wants to find heroism in this underclass Arab society, and how that fascinates him.

But, in the context of this film, it just doesn't really work. We're meant to see the man as the "hero" Audiard has in mind through the use of a cloying score and that ridiculous 'vision' in the last act, not because of his avoidance of corruption – let's remember he's a criminal throughout, he kills people and runs drugs, he's very corrupt.

Not that I'm trying to moralize, just illustrate that what your estimation of an Islamic prophet is doesn't really fit with this character.

Further, Audiard says in the same interview that the title is meant as ironic, which would suggest that Audiard doesn't in fact see him as a "prophet," as you suggest he does. My point is I think what he's trying to get at gets garbled.

no, it is you my American friend who have misunderstood. This film is about modern France. About an old guard and an underclass, about religion in a secular state.

Martyrs and prophets are not the same thing. This is where you come unstuck. In Islam, prophets are ordinary people, 'i am but a man like yourselves.' it is not neccessary for them to suffer, but to lead, teach and overcome.

Audiard does not say he is a prophet because he sacrafices but because ultimately he resists corruption.

Also, you talk about Bresson like he is a genre hack. No my friend it is you who do not understand.