Rabbit Proof Fence Response

After reading the articles and considering the movie, I think that Phillip Noyce went too far in manipulating his audience in trying to make a strong, emotional movie. Making a movie about something about something like the "Lost Generations" is very dangerous because as a filmmaker, he has to make something interesting that people will react and respond too. This might cause him to detract from the true story and create plot points that reflect steps of the Hero's Journey. This is also dangerous because in a story with a hero, there has to be some sort of a villain, which might cause in this case Noyce to accentuate Mr. Neville's bad intentions. For example, Peter Howson and Des Moore write, "[Neville's] mother received about 500 letters from Aborigines praising his efforts on their behalf. A true story would have shown his humane actions to protect them from exploitation by whites or their own kin." Although some might disagree with the what he did and how he did it, Neville had good intentions which is shown by how many letters he received from Aborigines. This shows that his actions turned out to be successful in many cases. However, in the movie, they make him out to be "a devil" which is what they have the girls call him at Moore River.
I don't think I can totally side with Peter Howson and Des Moore on the view that Neville's actions were completely out of good intentions and that the movie is way off from the truth. However, I feel that the evidence of the 500 letters received by Neville's mother and other evidence make a case that the "Rabbit-Proof Fence" movie is somewhat exaggerated.