Before watching this documentary, there were some preconceptions of Cuban life as being a miserable existence from which all Cubans wanted to escape from. Afterwards however, these ideas have been replaced with a more positive portrayal. Things might not be ideal, but they are not as bad as expected. It is important to consider that this film was made in 1974 and as such, circumstances have changed either for the better, worse, or are mostly the same.
It seems the best words to summarize this film were written by Gary Evans in his book In the national interest: a chronicle of the National Film Board of Canada and by Peter Rist in Guide to the Cinemas of Canada.
"It is a reflexive piece about documentary method and methodology" (Evans).
The film's director Michael Rubbo "makes his way to Cuba with Joey Smallwood (the socialist former premier of Newfoundland) and the film's investor Geoff Stirling (a conservative entrepreneur who owns a chain of radio and television stations)" (Rist).
"Stirling had put up the money to make a documentary on Cuba, the cornerstone of which was to be an interview between Castro and Smallwood. He was in the venture for profit, pure and simple. Rubbo wanted a film that was valuable and culturally profitable. The pugnacious Stirling attacks the Cuban revolutionary goal of socially useful work, doubting the principle of work for its own sake, when machines do it better. Rubbo, reflecting the generosity of spirit and cultivated innocence that characterized the way the Film Board embraced documentary film, is willing to accept Cuban reforms at their face value. In a sumptuous hall or on a beach where Stirling stands on his head, the film is reduced to three men waiting Godot-like for the interview that never happens before the camera. Smallwood, the self-proclaimed diplomatist and television personality, enjoys celebrity status with Castro off-screen, a frustrated Stirling attacks Rubbo and the spendthrift Film Board for wasting film footage, and a credulous Rubbo is left to show 'truth' as the Cubans and his companions reveal it to him" (Evans). "The film [thus] documents their exploration of Cuba while they wait" (Rist).
Some might share Stirling's opposing views to child labor, but to others it might appear to be a good method of teaching different skills, cooperation for sustenance, and instill a sense of self sufficiency. Similarly with the construction workers, it was interesting that eighty percent of them had some sort of medical education and did not have construction experience, and yet they learned and build.
In a way, this documentary helped portray Cuba and the government's programs as a useful tool to teach skills that will improve and help the collective progress towards stability and independence. Whether these programs have fulfilled their purpose is a different matter.
