In post-production, editors rely on creative techniques to turn raw footage into compelling narratives. One such method is called Frankenbiting, where editors stitch together dialogue audio fragments to create a seamless new story. B-roll footage often hides the cuts, so audiences may not detect the edits. Frankenbiting is popular in reality TV, documentaries, and news segments. It can compress time, enhance drama, or clarify chaotic scenes. Yet, when overused, it raises ethical and legal questions around manipulating a person’s statements. Sequence with Frankenbites | Source: CineD As an editor, I’ve noticed a growing reliance on Frankenbiting. I have personally worked on more than a few documentary series that have relied entirely on Frankenbiting – the entire episode being nearly just a montage of rearranged audio snippets that sound continuous. Even fragments of words are sometimes spliced together to create statements that interview subjects never actually said. These edits are often made at the direction of story producers. Producers favor Frankenbiting because it cuts costs. Shorter interviews, faster production, and fewer filming days all save money. However, this approach places editors in positions that can feel misleading. Source: Midjourney, CineD The many uses of Frankenbiting Frankenbiting serves multiple purposes in post-production. When used thoughtfully, it can improve scene flow significantly. Common uses include: Clarifying Conversations: Removing pauses or combining statements helps create concise dialogue. Creating Drama or Tension: Reality TV uses Frankenbiting to heighten conflict, shaping events that may not have unfolded that way. Shaping Character Arcs: By piecing footage together,...
Published By: CineD - Wednesday, 30 October