The Film Rabbit Proof-Fence: the Eradication of Half Castes Existence - Movie Review Example

Movie review: Rabbit Proof Fence

What are the most prominent issue(s) this film addresses?

The film Rabbit Proof Fence addresses racism where there is the eradication of half-castes existence. The girls in the film (Molly, Daisy, and Gracie) are the half castes as their parents are one Aboriginal and one white. According to Neville, Australia’s Aboriginal groups are dangers to themselves hence the eradication. The girls together with other girls belonging to the “half-castes” are to be taken where they would grow up and then become servants as well as laborers to the whites. Being laborers to the whites is seen as a” good “situation to the girls in life. In due course, they would get married to white people and therefore the white “blood” would diminish. The children flee and on their way, white authorities pursue them as well as an Aboriginal tracker known as Moodoo who is not so interested in finding them. Nevertheless, there are some whites who show kindness to the girls for instance Mavis. It also addresses benign neglect. The distance which was created by the audience and the three girls betrays the film's intent of reflecting upon the whites in Australian ways in which they failed their native people. We see Ken Radley who tells the girls where they are and suggesting to them a shortcut for reaching home. Other people also help on the way even with food and clothing. However, they did this, only to the point where it’s no inconvenience to them.it shows that even though there were some Australians in the 1930s who would have wanted to help these Aboriginal families, they had a feeling of powerlessness due to the power of authorities.

Active abuse where when the girls come across a farmhouse Mavis who is an Aboriginal servant does not get to respite as her master intrudes and the girls try to hide and he removes his trouser and leaves it by the door and her life’s reality becomes clear. Most females went through sexual assault in the institutions where they placed. What appeals to me in this film is its power to evoke emotions.it gives one an idea of how the half-castes used to be oppressed and also stepped on.it teaches the aboriginals the way of assimilating themselves into the white culture so as to get rid of the “black side” of each Aboriginal.it is also appealing to see how the three young girls were tenacious as they ran away so as to get back to their homes. Another appealing event is seeing that the things which we learn which happened in Australia are still happening even in the United States of America. There is a lot of racism that exists whereby most people think that white people are superior and smarter compared to people of dark skin. Keeping in mind that this film is based on a true story, it is really astonishing and amazing to see how the girls traveled through the desert for so many days and covered almost 1000 miles. It’s very fulfilling to see how most people especially the locals helped the girls all through the journey in different ways even offering them food and the Indian stalling to capture them so that Milloy can escape.it is also amazing to see display of unity and leadership which had a huge impact as well as difference to the society. The scene where Milloy succeeded in leaving the camp with the sisters showed a lot of unity and strength on their part. The part where Molly’s mother and grandmother were able to withstand the government official was such a powerful scene. It illustrates one is capable of overpowering obstacles if they stand tall and withstand their grounds (Olsen, 2011).

What unsettles or makes me angry about this film is that I felt that Neville was portrayed in the film inaccurately as paternalistic and a racist and portrayed the situation of the girls as generally rosy before they were removed from their parents’ home. I feel that the girls who were the prisoners should have worn European clothes as portrayed in the recent photos. Molly Craig who owned the story said that it was not her story as hers continued even when she became an adult and it was not resolved nicely as the movies’ ending made it appear. They should have used her story without adding other details which she didn’t know and didn’t experience.

The events in the film seem to be incorrect and are a distortion of the history of how the aboriginal children were treated.in the real sense, these children were well cared for and they never had underage sex with the white people. There is no historical evidence to Neville’s speech about extinguishing the “half-castes”. The speech is fabricated. The book by the protagonist’s daughter in which the film is based states that the girls were not forced to leave. Their parents knew before that they would be taken. They also left in a horse and not a motorcar. They did it voluntarily. Aboriginal children were not removed forcibly and if they were, it was very rare in the early twentieth century. Whenever it happened, it was for the benefit of those children. The Moore river settlement was not only for children as is shown in the film. The settlement was a welfare settlement for “half-castes” of any age. The children who went there did so mostly with their parents. The film portrays the Moore river settlement as a prison but it was not the case. Most aboriginals who went there did it willingly and on a temporary basis so that they can access welfare (Olsen, 2011).

Rabbit proof fence explores the Stolen Generation’s historical process. The movie gives a translation of the Stolen Generation’s historical event into an experience which is very powerful as well as empathic.it challenges history’s preconceived notions as well as its affiliate ideologies.it explores other ideas such as(a) child removal where the three girls were removed from their homes forcefully and taken to the settlement.(b)discrimination, the three girls were discriminated upon as the officials felt that the aborigines blood should diminish and only white blood should be left. Officials also believed that the aborigines who had English blood in them were smarter than the ones who were pure blooded and also they were more educable. They discriminated against the aborigines as they felt that they were an inferior race. Even though the whites knew about fairness and justice, most of the laws which they created were in their favor. When the aborigines committed crimes, the whites’ authorities were not as strict as they were when the whites committed them. (c) Cultural and gender bias whereby the only people who faced the ill treatment were the girls, they were the only ones taken to the institution and not the boys. The culture of the aborigines was seen as inferior and the whites did not like them. They favored themselves more and did not treat the aborigine culture with fairness. They were looked down upon even though the ones who were not pure were treated better.