My interpretation of the repeated scenes is that the entire movie was a flashback -- the beating did not actually happen twice, it's just that in the end we finally put the event in context.

Although I was only just born in 1961, I can understand the criticism of some others who were there or close to Dave van Ronk that the joylessness of this movie is not representative of the scene or of him. It really has to be seen on its own terms, as its own story, that like a Dylan song draws inspiration and even some lines from the past, but is really a separate creation, eaving us with some who cry "thief" and others who don't. I'm not sure where I stand, in the end, except that I know I was not laughing as hard as a few other people in the theater, and wished that I could have.

~ Becky in Long Beach