"Man Bites Dog" - Did the Documentary Crew's Descent Feel Earned, or Just Shock Value?

Okay, so I just watched "Man Bites Dog" for the first time, and woah. I knew it was gonna be dark, but damn. My big question is about the pacing of the doc crew's involvement. AndersonCuts here - pacing is my life, ya know? I get that the whole point is the gradual erosion of their morality, but did it feel... natural? Or did it feel like just a series of escalating shock moments? Like, one minute they're filming, the next they're helping Ben pick victims based on their financial situation (that welfare check scene was brutal!), and then BAM, they're raping a woman. That jump felt HUGE. I'm not saying it's bad. It's definitely effective at making you feel sick. But I'm wondering if it could've been structured differently to make their descent (especially Rémy Belvaux's) feel less abrupt. Maybe more scenes of them rationalizing their actions, or maybe a lingering shot as they watch Ben do his thing, showing the seed of their own depravity taking root. The scene where they kill the postman went hard though, ngl. Felt like things got properly ugly there. I think what I'm struggling with is the transition from observer to active participant. I get that the film is supposed to be uncomfortable and challenge our own complicity in watching violence, but that transition feels...clumsy? Like they just skipped a few steps to get to the outrage. What do you guys think? Was that sudden shift intentional, a way to jolt the viewer and illustrate how easily we can be desensitized? Or was it just a shortcut to increase the shock value? I'm open to interpretations, and I'm curious if anyone else felt the same way about the pacing of their descent into darkness.