I seem to fall between the two camps of critical reaction. The majority who feel this is a classic, great film, or a sizable minority who call the film boring, historically inaccurate, and all surface.

I find myself agreeing with some points made by the critics, e.g., being bothered that the film never really examines how hated the French were for their earlier colonialism. That larger context is part of what makes these Brothers targets. One passing mention is hardly enough to deal with a huge element of the underpinnings of the story.

You could use it to make the Brothers seem even more brave and to more deeply understand that they took a risk to reach out and just be there even before things get 'bad', and/or to make the hatred they faced from the terrorists and the Army not just seem random.

To be clear, that hatred is unforgivable. But understanding how something happened, or why your enemy hates you doesn't equal forgiving terrorism. But is part of the path to peace. And it is something these wise, well read monks would have known about and must have been part of their thoughts and discussions, though its largely avoided here.

I also agree that the film is slow in parts, sometimes needed to establish the rhythm of the monks' lives, but other times getting repetitive with no seeming advantage.

In addition, besides the two main characters, the other monks are largely one-note sketches, and the sudden turn around of those who wanted to leave – maybe the most fascinating action in the film - is largely under explored, Some of the time spent used on repeated rituals or re-tread conversations could have been used to deepen the understanding of those men and their heartrending confusion.

It also bothered me that those who wanted to leave are never given the strong or convincing arguments they easily could have. They're almost made to seem cowardly, or 'wrong'. The film could have gone further in it's compassion towards these men, and understanding that this was a complex decision, even on a theological level. When does God want us to martyr ourselves and when would God rather we not sacrifice the gift of life to find a way to live to fight another day? I can think of a number of third choices between surrender and simply running away. These men must have examined those options, but there is little sign of it here. I have no problem with the film's conclusion, but I wish it had felt both sides presented with equal weight and seriousness, as I assume must have happened among the real monks.

But my biggest problem is that the film's style, while inviting thought, is somewhat emotionally distancing, so while my brain was deeply engaged, my heart was less than I wish it was. I wanted to weep for these men and for the world, but I found myself more caught in mind than in emotions. I believe the story was strong enough to carry both.

Now, all that said, I still think, unlike many of the professional critics that raised these points, that this is a very, very good film, made with intelligence and passion. It is visually simple but stunning to look at. Its slow pace adds to the meditative, un-Hollywood feel that eschews inflating drama for its own sake, and allows us a taste of the peace these men experience by living in their simple, giving way, even in the midst of war. And there are scenes of sheer brilliance, where whole stories are told on peoples' faces with little or no dialogue. Scenes where a combination of photography and acting capture a huge range of complex emotions. We watch fear, joy, transcendence, defeat, and loss run through the hearts of these men within seconds of each other without a word needing to be said, That is film-making of a high order.

Ultimately, this is a film that deserves and needs to be seen. A plea for peace and courage in the face of hatred. But that doesn't mean it isn't a flawed work, or that acknowledging those flaws dismisses those very good things the film does accomplish.

¨Des Hommes et Des Dieux¨is a magnificent religious picture about faith and sacrifice . Under threat by Islamic terrorists, a group (Laudembach , Rabourdin , Herlin, Pichon , Maly) of Trappist priests ( led by Lambert Wilson) stationed with an impoverished Algerian society must decide whether to leave or stay .French priests are living, working and praying in a catholic monastery in Algeria in the 90s during civil war and while help by various means to Algerian people , as the doctor monk (Michael Londsdale) heals ills , and other teaches and writting letters for the illiterate people . It starts showing how the Islamic locals and the Christian community coexist in harmony. The situation with the Algerian Fundamentalist-terrorists turns worse . They are very much appreciated by the local Arab population, but very much in danger . This becomes clear after some Croation workers are cruelly murdered by the guerrilla-forces. At some point they are threatened and unwanted by both guerrilla-fighters , the government and Military ,their presence results to less and less sure and obvious . In the end they are all can be kidnapped by the terrorists to swap them for their own prisoners in France or hidden or getting freedom to God.

This spiritual film is full of good feeling , stern life , touching sacrifice , and enjoyable relationship among monks . It describes their simple and austere existence only threatened by Islamism and intolerance , but they will have to decide whether to stay or go back to France . Tension and drama enhances when intense confrontations take place with each other, the terrorists and the locals, they all decide to stay. Sensational performances from main cast as Lambert Wilson and Michael Lonsdale along with the remaining monks as Rabourdin , Laudenbach ,and Pichon . Special mention for Jacques Herlin as a likable old priest , Herlin is a veteran secondary actor continuously working from the 60s . Sensitive and religious music score based in Gregorian songs . Very good and extraordinary cinematography filmed on location in Tioumliline Monastery, Azrou, Morocco . This powerful picture was stunningly directed by Xavier Beaouvous , a good actor , writer and director . Rating : Better than average ; well worth watching , because being plenty of luminous sensibility , brotherhood , love , holy feeling, faith and martyrdom.

"Of Gods and Men" is a very well made French-language film. However, I also think it has limited appeal, as most folks who go to the theater want to laugh and be entertained. "Of Gods and Men", on the other hand, is a quiet little film--one that might inspire you but certainly won't appeal to broader audiences. I can understand, however, how this film impressed people at Cannes and other film festivals--it's a quality film that makes you think--having a greater depth than a typical film.

This story is about a small monastery with eight monks in Algeria during the 1990s. The nation was racked with civil war--with Islamists committing terror acts across the country. Here in the US, the news hardly ever talks about this nation--though the death count in all this strife has been horrific during the last few decades (between 150,000-200,000 deaths in this rather small nation). Through the course of this film based on real events, the men must decide whether to leave or to stay. They want to stay, as the local villagers care about them and rely on the monks' medical care--but the men have no desire to stay just to become martyrs--especially since the Islamists have been targeting Christians. What will come of them? The film is inspiring but, fortunately, not in a cloying manner. It is NOT just some feel-good film but represents people acting like real people--with all their doubts and conflicts. While not a huge crowd-pleaser, the film is very good and worth your time.

By the way, Michael Lonsdale got a lot of praise and an award for his part in the film. He was the villain from the bad James Bond film "Moonraker" and VERY frequent actor/supporting actor in French films--and he was very good in the film. However, so were all the cast members and I cannot see why Lonsdale alone received the César Award (sort of like a French Oscar) as best supporting actor. Odd. Perhaps this was intended as sort of a lifetime achievement award, as this very prolific actor has more than 200 credits as of 2011!