Analysis Of Rabbit Proof Fence

979 Words4 Pages
Shedding light on a heinous chapter of Australian history, Phillip Noyce’s 2002 film adaption of the book by Doris Pilkington, Rabbit Proof Fence serves as a glaring reminder of the atrocities suffered by those of the “stolen generation”. Set in 1931, the film portrays a simplified version of the early life of three Aboriginal girls and their daring journey from an “integration program” to home again via the Rabbit Proof Fence. They are pursued by A.O. Neville (Branagh), the school director, whom, under government authority, is taking Aboriginal children from their homes and placing them in schools to be educated or more accurately, indoctrinated. Rabbit Proof Fence, through its compelling storyline and depiction of harsh reality, highlights to us that the real villain in colonial Australia was the government and it’s utterly racist policies. As a critic, this film struck me, as I’m sure it will many other viewers, in its veracity of the truth when displaying potentially painful situations. For example, when Constable Riggs takes the girls, it addresses kidnapping and maternal love, and yet there is no obvious intention to make the audience feel a certain way. The topic of the “stolen generation” is a touchy topic to many Australians and certain Brits, and so I admire Noyce’s tenacity in his forthright presentation of this issue. A.O. Neville, the main antagonist of the film, is a middle aged, colonial British man who serves the Australian government under the position
Open Document