It seems like most of the 1 star reviews on IMDb, from reading through this, didn't actually watch the film.
Most of what they claim aren't present in the film at all, they are assumptions of what the MRA is and not what is stated in the documentary.
And then there are entire reviews about thing that aren't even a part of the documentary.
So clearly this is polarizing, but I haven't seen polarization where it's this blatant that one side didn't bother to watch the film.
At any rate, the Cassie video journals are interesting as we see how her own thoughts evolved on the subject (if they are real) and the interviews are nice, especially with how they openly contradict one another. They give you the feeling that one side of the debate just isn't listening to the other.
But ultimately, it is a fail stylistically. You have documentaries like "The Corporation," "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," that all do a decent job of presenting their sides with a bit more style.
Even some of the interview locations where show with semi-distracting backgrounds.
The substance is there. And the even-handedness seems to be there as well, thought she does make conclusions (which is fair to do) she also does it with enough integrity to show the other side of the debate and even cover the history.
The problem is one of style, but that's like a club tie and a firm handshake, its something that can be picked up over time.