Anyone else find Patriots Day's split personality jarring?

Peter Berg's Patriots Day uses real footage of the actual Boston event - and events - and works it into his film. It's obvious it's real and not recreated; the lack of resolution alone is enough to tell you. Yet it's not stylistically highlighted as different: it's just slipped in, the way you'd slip in any other cutaway to an explosion or security camera footage, if this were just any old movie about some made-up event.

Does anyone else find this incredibly jarring and distracting? Real footage of real events is called a documentary, and demands a completely different attitude in response to it than does recreated footage for the purpose of a fiction film (I know there are people who bridle at my use of the word "fiction" here, because they think fiction entails false; it doesn't, but substitute the phrase "proper movie" if you're one of them).

Stephen Potter's aesthetic principle "Be one thing or the other" has wide application and it certainly applies here, I think. If Berg couldn't recreate all the shots he needed - and couldn't use real footage invisibly - he shouldn't have recreated any. On the other hand, if he wanted to make a documentary, he should have made a documentary.

Although he probably shouldn't have made a documentary. Once he runs out of found footage he can cheat with, the film becomes an excellent police procedural thriller.