Going from panel 4 to 5 was also very smooth for me. I think David's page is a perfect example of when breaking the 180 rule helps better serve the story. My interpretation of the 180 rule is that it helps establish a smooth flow when going from frame to frame. It helps reinforce our knowledge of the environment and the relationship between whoever is in the scene and allows us to focus on the action. Right at the beginning of the page, David sets the scene and establishes whose on the left and right and what's going on behind them. I don't have to figure that out as I'm going from panel to panel, and instead can focus on a dude getting mugged. And in panel four when the two look towards the hero, it sets an expectation that I'm going to be surprised. The hero's reveal is sudden and shocking and I believe breaking the rule helps bolster the impact of the scene. So I guess if I had to answer, the 180 rule applies for as long as it serves the narrative whether it be for a few frames or a whole page if not longer. And to me, using the character's eyes is a fantastic way to introduce a new camera angle. I don't know if David did this consciously or instinctively because he never mentions it.

I don't want to speak for David Finch, but here is a pretty popular example of Neal Adams using tangents to create a face of Deadman. I think it's important to understand rules are not there as hard never break things, they are there to help people self-correct their own work. In this case how do you avoid making your page look flat. As far as your page, yes and no. The tangent doesn't bother the flow but the first panel doesn't establish a solid environment so it looks a bit like a floating object with no dimension. The second panel I understand it's zooming into the mouth but it might be framed too tightly for others to read instantly. Most honest feedback I can give.