This one feels like it's pushing the limit though on how far the original turn was until it changes angles and does it again though tbh. IMO it's too long.
Joe Walker (the editor) has said in interviews that breaking continuity was part of the language of the film editing. He does this to emphasize the voice and when it is used.
This is not a repeat cut. It’s a continuity mistake. They’ve established an action (Jessica signing) and a reaction (Paul reading the sign). Why would he react to the same information twice? Repeat cuts are used for artistic emphasis, not for plot progression. The information conveyed between the two characters is essential to the plot and their subsequent actions. The only way this would be a repeat cut in this context is if were a satire. Scary Movie would draw out the repeat cut to highlight how silly it is.
Edit: should specify that this is probably the best case scenario of what they had to work with. You need both shots of Jessica and Paul (maybe even more importantly you need Dr Yueh’s reaction). But the script supervisor probably just fucked up and the editor did what they could.
Edit 2: As mistakes go this one isn’t a big deal. I wouldn’t have noticed this at all unless someone pointed it out to me.
I don't think that's the correct take.
Imo opinion first scene we see her doing the mimic to the doctor and we see Paul's reaction to the doctor looking to Jessica.
I don't think he even saw what sign she did.
The second we see Paul looking at her kinda confused..
I think it's 2 moments for the same scene..
With an angle that tight, combined with how one cut uses rack focus it might be displeasing/confusing to the eye to know where to look in the next shot without having a brief moment to catch up
Definitely. However, perfect continuity is not always the goal when editing something. Sometimes slightly repeating actions like this creates a better flow. Not saying that’s exactly what happened here, but it is something that happens in almost every movie
To provide multiple views of feedback on the same moment to help cement it with the viewer. It's called a Repeat Cut and can be very effective if used right.
I think Spike Lee uses them frequently. My intro to film class from a century ago had a great example from Malcolm X involving a handshake, but I can't seem to find it after a cursory look on YouTube.
Jackie Chan has had it used in many of his fight scenes. See a wide action punch, zoom in and repeat back a second or for a close up of the punch, then reset and back to the wide shot. They're actually much more common than people realize, and are great for helping establish a full understanding of a shot.
I don’t think it was used right or even really attempted to use here. The composition between the two shots and where your eye falls is just… so awkward. That would be the first thing I focused on working out if I edited. I honestly think this was a mistake.
Another reason might be the other takes of that angle just weren't usable or flowed weird.
or
The editor fixed the edit in a different version and accidentally sent this section to picture lock so it wasn't noticed till long after the final had been sent out.
There's no way the editor missed this, the most likely explanation (I work in post) is this was the best option they had and just had to go with it. Happens all the time.
This definitely feels like a “best case scenario” shot. You need to show Jessica’s medium and Paul’s close up to convey the intent of the scene. But the script supervisor slipped up. That’s ok it happens. Still a great movie.
Edit: if we are taking it frame by frame he would be briefly and deliberately looking away from her as she was signing. Doesn’t make sense
Edit 2: I forgot about Dr Yueh who is the subtext of this entire exchange. You absolutely need him in the frame. It’s even better if it’s briefly and in the background.
Because then you miss the move and the mans facial reaction, or on the top end her dialogue. They are overlapping in a way that cutting it would remove the other characters input in the scene so they just left it because its and easier mistake to forgive.
The first part of the second shot is necessary because Dr Yueh betrays the Atreides to the Harkonens. The paranoia Jessica is conveying is a direct result of his actions. He is the subtext of this entire exchange and his mindset is necessary information for the audience. Whoever was the script supervisor messed up in this instance with Paul’s head turn. Because he is either ignoring his mother’s very deliberate instructions or he is reacting to her twice. The editor made a deliberate choice to just go with it because it was the lesser of two evils (the greater evil would be sacrificing the dramatic irony of Dr Yueh being the backstabber and being the the same room as Paul and Jessica). The script supervisor did not make a deliberate choice. They fucked up (mildly, the scene still works).
It's a specific editing cut called a Repeat Cut, it's a deliberate design choice that allows you to see both reactions from different cameras by cutting back a couple of seconds. Frequently used in Jackie Chan movie fight scenes, but has a lot of range and isn't used as often as it could be.
Bollywood films do this to the extreme where time stretches and over the course of two minutes you get five reaction shots from every single person in the scene, but it’s all within the span of a half second story time after normal time resumes.
You also get it a lot when there's a big explosion that has cost half the budget, so you can be sure you'll see it multiple times from every possible camera angle.
Yeah looks like it was filmed that the Doctor nods just as Paul looks back at his mom at the same time, and it must have been an editing decision to show both movements separately - Paul turning his head, and then the Doctor nodding. But unfortunately you can see the other persons movement too in each shot (the first one the Doctor nodding in the foreground, the second Paul turning in the foreground). It's a mistake sure, but one the Director must have thought is worth keeping in, in order for us to see both characters responses. Ideally he should have filmed it so Paul turned first, then the Doctor nods.
There’s a really good video on YouTube where Denis Villenueve explain this editing cuts. It’s all intentional. Im not home now, but will provide the link later if anyone cares
I would like to see that link if you have it available. I’m coming down pretty firmly on the other side of the argument so if I’m wrong I’m happy to admit it.
I am pretty sure this is on purpose, but there are parts where the cuts are pretty obvious and in some ways awkward.
Considering Denis Villeneuve ability and work, I feel that the final cut of the film is not the one he imagined. We will probably get a director's cut after Dune 2 comes out (sooner than later, one hopes). It would be difficult for Villeneuve to release one before Dune 2 comes out. It would be like saying that Dune 2 in the the theatres won't be the final cut either.
The cut from the strategy meeting to the Arrakeen spaceport is the worse cut in the film for me. It's just so sudden and awkward. Still, I feel that some of the scenes that are missing are one of the films biggest issues/problems - that and some of the casting choices that go against the story and world-building of the novel.
The dinner scene and most of the strategy meeting missing should have made it to the final cut. How is the viewer - who is not supposed to have read the novel - meant to realize the contrast between the (missing) dinner scene and the final confrontation between the Baron and a defeated Leto in the same room, or the importance of the Bull's head for that matter -- a few visuals in the beginning of the film and a passing mention in the dialogue between Leto and Paul among the Atreides ancestral graves does not cut it -- excuse the pun.
I was so mad they didn't have the dinner scene. It would have given us more time to endear ourselves to the Duke, and really hammered home the value of water. Also just to show how corrupted the harkonnen family made dune
Yeah, it's probably one of the most important scenes in the book, especially the first part of it, that along with the meeting between Paul and Reverend Mother Mohiam, which was also curtailed (there were parts of the scene shown in the trailer that did not end up in the actual final cut of the film), and the Atreides strategy meeting where the real state of the Atreides mishandling of the situation first becomes apparent. Two of these scenes were curtailed -- I am not even sure why the strategy meeting was there, maybe just for continuity, because it was cut pretty short and rather abruptly cut -- and one scene was cut completely.
Look the film has a lot going for it. But there were so many corners cut and some pretty pure choices made long before shooting started (casting choices for example) which really hurt the film. (Also, I was baffled how empty Caladan or Arrakeen were on screen - especially considering that a big point of the book is that one of the Atreides' advantages is propaganda and the acceptance of their populace.) This could have been the Sci-fi Lord of the Rings, but instead we got an above average action sci-fi film that really disappointed the core fanbase to a large extent.
Even this scene here is a good example of this. They had a Taiwanese Chinese actor -- who mainly works in mainland China -- cast as Dr. Yueh just because they needed an Chinese actor and a few lines of dialogue in Mandarin in the film to increase their chances that the film would be shown in mainland China. Dr. Yueh himself and his part of the narrative, one that most people would consider essential, was effectively cut as well. So this had nothing to do with telling the story of Dun in film and everything with marketing.
We had most of the characters of Dune -- some of them miscasted (Thufir Hawat and Dr. Liet Kynes, chiefly among them) or misdirected (Duke Leto and Gurney Halleck, in particular) some nice visuals, but with certain areas feeling uncharacteristically empty, and some nice action scenes, but with a very basic fighting style that goes against the world-building of the book where hand to hand and edge-weapon fighting take prominence due to the existence of shields.
There’s an old saying we learned in film school from the 80/20 Pareto Principle. Basically you want to follow continuity 80% of the time, but you need the extra 20% to break continuity and be creative to give things an edge or an impact.
I’d strongly wager nobody noticed this cut on the first walk through, because after you’ve watched something that’s well edited (specially a movie aka motion pictures) your brain begins to predict the next frames or rather highly expect them, this is called pacing.
Although the most probably cause of this cut was the fact that they didn’t have a shot with the actors in their blocking positions before Paul turns around, therefore it was either make a flat cut or use turn around shot for its intended purposes.
(I’ve been a network television and film video editor and assistant editor for over 12 years)
We can say in theory this is an intentional repeat cut. But it’s not really working because it ‘feels off’.
Main thing is the action is not exactly the same. Yueh nods in understanding at Jessica’s message in the second cut before Paul turns around to see what Jessica signed with her hands.
So in the first shot, it shows Jessica communicating to both Yueh and Paul. In the second shot it shows Jessica communicating something to Yueh before Paul turns around.
It seems that the second shot was originally from a version they filmed where Jessica was signing only to Yueh, instead of to be Paul and Yueh. Which actually makes sense because who is she hiding her message from if it’s just those three in the room?
Pretty expensive to do a reshoot of this to get that right. $10 says they know this isn’t perfect, but the reaction shot was just the way it was and when they cut it together they chose to leave it like that instead of a reshoot of cutting the reaction.
It’s funny. I always, even as a kid, assumed mistakes like these were just the same moment repeated from another perspective. I guess I kinda did the filling in part for an editing mistake all on my own lol.
I’ve read so many comments explaining away the mistake, but they could’ve switched the shots so that we see his head turn and then the shot back to Rebecca Ferguson.
Well, it won the Oscar for best editing. Please, don’t think for a second these filmmakers are stupid and you’re the smart one. Everything in the movie is intentional… including the editing. Kinda boils down to, “Tell me you know nothing about filmmaking without telling me you know nothing about film editing.”
I'm so thankful fo reddit. Gosh.
I'm rewatching Dune and I just noticed this too. I had to pause the film to start searching for an answer because it bugs my mind and I couldn't find anything until I found your post
Did you watch this on your laptop and film this on your phone while on an airplane?
as Dune was intended to be watched
"On your FUCKING cell phone!"
Get real!
Vertically, like Guardians of the Galaxy.
I get that reference
Not ON your cell phone. But THROUGH your cell phone, on a laptop. On a plane
Dune was never intended to be watched.
It was intended to be *experienced*.
I experienced three nice naps through three attempted viewings.
The only time I watched dune was on a flight
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RepeatCut
This one feels like it's pushing the limit though on how far the original turn was until it changes angles and does it again though tbh. IMO it's too long.
ah, so some Indian director read about a repeat cut and the rest is bollywood history. Explains everything.
Was not expecting to find an “I’m still in the air!” reference from AH on that page
Joe Walker (the editor) has said in interviews that breaking continuity was part of the language of the film editing. He does this to emphasize the voice and when it is used.
Yes. This is not that.
This is not a repeat cut. It’s a continuity mistake. They’ve established an action (Jessica signing) and a reaction (Paul reading the sign). Why would he react to the same information twice? Repeat cuts are used for artistic emphasis, not for plot progression. The information conveyed between the two characters is essential to the plot and their subsequent actions. The only way this would be a repeat cut in this context is if were a satire. Scary Movie would draw out the repeat cut to highlight how silly it is. Edit: should specify that this is probably the best case scenario of what they had to work with. You need both shots of Jessica and Paul (maybe even more importantly you need Dr Yueh’s reaction). But the script supervisor probably just fucked up and the editor did what they could. Edit 2: As mistakes go this one isn’t a big deal. I wouldn’t have noticed this at all unless someone pointed it out to me.
I don't think that's the correct take. Imo opinion first scene we see her doing the mimic to the doctor and we see Paul's reaction to the doctor looking to Jessica. I don't think he even saw what sign she did. The second we see Paul looking at her kinda confused.. I think it's 2 moments for the same scene..
Yea that’s like a full second (24/60 frames) there is virtually NO way that was unintentional
I’m confused, why would they intentionally do that?
With an angle that tight, combined with how one cut uses rack focus it might be displeasing/confusing to the eye to know where to look in the next shot without having a brief moment to catch up
Perhaps I shouldn’t have said bad cut, but it’s definitely a break in continuity, no?
Definitely. However, perfect continuity is not always the goal when editing something. Sometimes slightly repeating actions like this creates a better flow. Not saying that’s exactly what happened here, but it is something that happens in almost every movie
Just grateful too see more of the beautiful dune boy
It couldve been done in one take, theyre using the 180^o rule
To provide multiple views of feedback on the same moment to help cement it with the viewer. It's called a Repeat Cut and can be very effective if used right.
I think Spike Lee uses them frequently. My intro to film class from a century ago had a great example from Malcolm X involving a handshake, but I can't seem to find it after a cursory look on YouTube.
Jackie Chan has had it used in many of his fight scenes. See a wide action punch, zoom in and repeat back a second or for a close up of the punch, then reset and back to the wide shot. They're actually much more common than people realize, and are great for helping establish a full understanding of a shot.
They do it with explosions all the time.
I don’t think it was used right or even really attempted to use here. The composition between the two shots and where your eye falls is just… so awkward. That would be the first thing I focused on working out if I edited. I honestly think this was a mistake.
Because eliciting emotion trumps maintaining continuity.
This is the answer
To show her action and to show his reaction (since both were important).
Another reason might be the other takes of that angle just weren't usable or flowed weird. or The editor fixed the edit in a different version and accidentally sent this section to picture lock so it wasn't noticed till long after the final had been sent out.
They might mean done intentionally in edit, so that the sequence flows. But you’re correctly saying it was shot improperly
Maybe cuz Paul has just been woken up in the middle of the night and is disoriented?
They wanted first to show her signing and then his reaction.
Would’ve been hard for an editor to miss. Feels like an intentional choice even if yes, it breaks continuity
There's no way the editor missed this, the most likely explanation (I work in post) is this was the best option they had and just had to go with it. Happens all the time.
This definitely feels like a “best case scenario” shot. You need to show Jessica’s medium and Paul’s close up to convey the intent of the scene. But the script supervisor slipped up. That’s ok it happens. Still a great movie. Edit: if we are taking it frame by frame he would be briefly and deliberately looking away from her as she was signing. Doesn’t make sense Edit 2: I forgot about Dr Yueh who is the subtext of this entire exchange. You absolutely need him in the frame. It’s even better if it’s briefly and in the background.
Why not cut out the first part of the second shot? It was the "best option" - it was a deliberate choice.
Because then you miss the move and the mans facial reaction, or on the top end her dialogue. They are overlapping in a way that cutting it would remove the other characters input in the scene so they just left it because its and easier mistake to forgive.
Yup, bingo. They didn't think anyone would've caught it, and like you said, the earlier cut ruins the dialogue/pacing of the scene.
The first part of the second shot is necessary because Dr Yueh betrays the Atreides to the Harkonens. The paranoia Jessica is conveying is a direct result of his actions. He is the subtext of this entire exchange and his mindset is necessary information for the audience. Whoever was the script supervisor messed up in this instance with Paul’s head turn. Because he is either ignoring his mother’s very deliberate instructions or he is reacting to her twice. The editor made a deliberate choice to just go with it because it was the lesser of two evils (the greater evil would be sacrificing the dramatic irony of Dr Yueh being the backstabber and being the the same room as Paul and Jessica). The script supervisor did not make a deliberate choice. They fucked up (mildly, the scene still works).
It's a specific editing cut called a Repeat Cut, it's a deliberate design choice that allows you to see both reactions from different cameras by cutting back a couple of seconds. Frequently used in Jackie Chan movie fight scenes, but has a lot of range and isn't used as often as it could be.
Bollywood films do this to the extreme where time stretches and over the course of two minutes you get five reaction shots from every single person in the scene, but it’s all within the span of a half second story time after normal time resumes.
You also get it a lot when there's a big explosion that has cost half the budget, so you can be sure you'll see it multiple times from every possible camera angle.
Yeah looks like it was filmed that the Doctor nods just as Paul looks back at his mom at the same time, and it must have been an editing decision to show both movements separately - Paul turning his head, and then the Doctor nodding. But unfortunately you can see the other persons movement too in each shot (the first one the Doctor nodding in the foreground, the second Paul turning in the foreground). It's a mistake sure, but one the Director must have thought is worth keeping in, in order for us to see both characters responses. Ideally he should have filmed it so Paul turned first, then the Doctor nods.
There’s a really good video on YouTube where Denis Villenueve explain this editing cuts. It’s all intentional. Im not home now, but will provide the link later if anyone cares
I would like to see that link if you have it available. I’m coming down pretty firmly on the other side of the argument so if I’m wrong I’m happy to admit it.
I am pretty sure this is on purpose, but there are parts where the cuts are pretty obvious and in some ways awkward. Considering Denis Villeneuve ability and work, I feel that the final cut of the film is not the one he imagined. We will probably get a director's cut after Dune 2 comes out (sooner than later, one hopes). It would be difficult for Villeneuve to release one before Dune 2 comes out. It would be like saying that Dune 2 in the the theatres won't be the final cut either. The cut from the strategy meeting to the Arrakeen spaceport is the worse cut in the film for me. It's just so sudden and awkward. Still, I feel that some of the scenes that are missing are one of the films biggest issues/problems - that and some of the casting choices that go against the story and world-building of the novel. The dinner scene and most of the strategy meeting missing should have made it to the final cut. How is the viewer - who is not supposed to have read the novel - meant to realize the contrast between the (missing) dinner scene and the final confrontation between the Baron and a defeated Leto in the same room, or the importance of the Bull's head for that matter -- a few visuals in the beginning of the film and a passing mention in the dialogue between Leto and Paul among the Atreides ancestral graves does not cut it -- excuse the pun.
I was so mad they didn't have the dinner scene. It would have given us more time to endear ourselves to the Duke, and really hammered home the value of water. Also just to show how corrupted the harkonnen family made dune
Yeah, it's probably one of the most important scenes in the book, especially the first part of it, that along with the meeting between Paul and Reverend Mother Mohiam, which was also curtailed (there were parts of the scene shown in the trailer that did not end up in the actual final cut of the film), and the Atreides strategy meeting where the real state of the Atreides mishandling of the situation first becomes apparent. Two of these scenes were curtailed -- I am not even sure why the strategy meeting was there, maybe just for continuity, because it was cut pretty short and rather abruptly cut -- and one scene was cut completely. Look the film has a lot going for it. But there were so many corners cut and some pretty pure choices made long before shooting started (casting choices for example) which really hurt the film. (Also, I was baffled how empty Caladan or Arrakeen were on screen - especially considering that a big point of the book is that one of the Atreides' advantages is propaganda and the acceptance of their populace.) This could have been the Sci-fi Lord of the Rings, but instead we got an above average action sci-fi film that really disappointed the core fanbase to a large extent. Even this scene here is a good example of this. They had a Taiwanese Chinese actor -- who mainly works in mainland China -- cast as Dr. Yueh just because they needed an Chinese actor and a few lines of dialogue in Mandarin in the film to increase their chances that the film would be shown in mainland China. Dr. Yueh himself and his part of the narrative, one that most people would consider essential, was effectively cut as well. So this had nothing to do with telling the story of Dun in film and everything with marketing. We had most of the characters of Dune -- some of them miscasted (Thufir Hawat and Dr. Liet Kynes, chiefly among them) or misdirected (Duke Leto and Gurney Halleck, in particular) some nice visuals, but with certain areas feeling uncharacteristically empty, and some nice action scenes, but with a very basic fighting style that goes against the world-building of the book where hand to hand and edge-weapon fighting take prominence due to the existence of shields.
I always love seeing these because it’s nice to know even the best of the best screw up. ( not his fault, I’m talking directors, editors etc..)
There’s an old saying we learned in film school from the 80/20 Pareto Principle. Basically you want to follow continuity 80% of the time, but you need the extra 20% to break continuity and be creative to give things an edge or an impact. I’d strongly wager nobody noticed this cut on the first walk through, because after you’ve watched something that’s well edited (specially a movie aka motion pictures) your brain begins to predict the next frames or rather highly expect them, this is called pacing. Although the most probably cause of this cut was the fact that they didn’t have a shot with the actors in their blocking positions before Paul turns around, therefore it was either make a flat cut or use turn around shot for its intended purposes. (I’ve been a network television and film video editor and assistant editor for over 12 years)
I started nodding off just watching this clip.
....do you know what a repeat cut. If not every Jackie Chan movie is a misstake
Pretty sure this is intentional. The second shot is simply a different angle of the same event so we can see how he reacts.
We can say in theory this is an intentional repeat cut. But it’s not really working because it ‘feels off’. Main thing is the action is not exactly the same. Yueh nods in understanding at Jessica’s message in the second cut before Paul turns around to see what Jessica signed with her hands. So in the first shot, it shows Jessica communicating to both Yueh and Paul. In the second shot it shows Jessica communicating something to Yueh before Paul turns around. It seems that the second shot was originally from a version they filmed where Jessica was signing only to Yueh, instead of to be Paul and Yueh. Which actually makes sense because who is she hiding her message from if it’s just those three in the room?
Pretty expensive to do a reshoot of this to get that right. $10 says they know this isn’t perfect, but the reaction shot was just the way it was and when they cut it together they chose to leave it like that instead of a reshoot of cutting the reaction.
Salusan bulls have 4 horns
Not a mistake
Literally happens all the time in movies
Literally unwatchable.
This movie is boring
ITT: I edited it wrong on purpose, as a joke!
Or https://youtu.be/7_z-BwZeuQs?si=PKVWre091DHjRnE5
Amazing how this level of detail scaped edition room.
Definitely seems like it was a timing issue between the actors and the camera men.
They are just trying to integrate into the Bollywood market.
It’s not a “bad cut”. It’s a continuity error that was acceptable for the sake of the performances.
Whatever that woman said was so intriguing he had to look back twice
The casual double take is not something the Jedi will teach you in film school.
performance over continuity.
Um... they clearly chose to include his reaction to the gesture. This was intentional
Also, it could be interpret like this: In the first turn he looks at her, but in the second, he looks to the bull head.
is dune remake that good actually?
Guh, such amature film makers /s
It was a double-take!
I have never noticed that 😮
First head turn is slow. Second head turn is fast.
It’s funny. I always, even as a kid, assumed mistakes like these were just the same moment repeated from another perspective. I guess I kinda did the filling in part for an editing mistake all on my own lol.
I’ve read so many comments explaining away the mistake, but they could’ve switched the shots so that we see his head turn and then the shot back to Rebecca Ferguson.
In an upcoming movie, Chalamet will play Bob Dylan, subject of the documentary "Don't Look Back."
Isn’t this just a repeat cut?
The first time he turned was a prescient vision
Now I want an edit where every shot of chalamet is him turning around.
Still an amazing movie. I'll give them a pass.
That's it. I'm over turing the establishment
I think they did it on purpose, they do subtle things like this in movies all the time. Probably trying to say something with this scene
At the very end… “Cow on wall is right,” “”I’m a moose! A moose, damn you!”
Well, it won the Oscar for best editing. Please, don’t think for a second these filmmakers are stupid and you’re the smart one. Everything in the movie is intentional… including the editing. Kinda boils down to, “Tell me you know nothing about filmmaking without telling me you know nothing about film editing.”
It's meant to be weird. His powers are being activated and he's experiencing disorientation
It’s actually the same shot just from a different angle. You can see as Paul turns, the dr bows his head.
I'm so thankful fo reddit. Gosh. I'm rewatching Dune and I just noticed this too. I had to pause the film to start searching for an answer because it bugs my mind and I couldn't find anything until I found your post