I really want to give this movie more credit because at it's core it's a very engaging mockumentary which really does have something interesting to say. Like, there are aspects of it that genuinely make you think. The general plot as well as the thought that seems to have been put into the group dynamics are fantastic.
However there are several grievances I have with the movie.
First of all the acting ranges from bad to unbearable. You can always easily tell that these are actors reciting a script. I'm not saying that they are necessary bad actors, I think that the director is more at fault here. This is supposed to mimic a Vice documentary, why would you have your actors stick to the script as if they were playing a traditional Shakespeare drama? Ways of saying stuff that might seem to make sense or feel natural in the writers room, often make for uncomfortable, unnatural interactions when acted out for a camera that is constantly moving, itself part of what's happening on screen and often extremely close to the actors. This wouldn't be such a huge problem in a more standard movie format were scenes are much more fleshed out and choreagraphed, were awkward breaks and might be edited out or made less obvious by a cut from one canera to the other.
Doesn't in movie that's heavily dependant on believable character interactions it seem intuitive to let actors improvise way more?
Another things that's distracting is the writing in general. Throughout the movie it's extremely obvious that some lines of dialogue only seem like a setup for oneliners and jokes. There is a scene that's basically nothing but a rapid fire exchange of character A saying something and getting immediately shut up by something that's worthy to be put on a political brochure by character B for a few times in a row.

All this aside, for me the movie is still very much worthwhile and even a little lovable because of these shortcomings and I'd still recommend it to anyone.