Effects of Third World Cinema

Third cinema rejects the ideas of Hollywood, and the idea of film solely as a means of profit. Third cinema came about as a way for the 'other' to speak, instead of having their story told as a narrative from an outsiders point of view. I wonder, though, who is truly able to give a completely objective portrayal of the insiders point of view.
Also, by rejecting the idea of cinema as a means of personal expression, does third cinema lose its ability to evoke the emotions necessary to stir up a change, or to sway the viewers opinion on anything-- and is emotional imagery necessary to do these things? I wonder if this idea of influencing the viewer is the most important aspect of Third Cinema, or if it is simply the true portrayal of the 'other'-- the portrayal of the past from the bottom, instead of as a narrative-- that is important.

I wonder if Gabriels is not simply creating yet another myth by his portrayal of the Ceddo. By telling their story, is he not putting up yet another frame around their story? What really constitutes a true insiders point of view, devoid of mythology?