Question about crossing the 180 degree line.

harmonica44 · Aug 27, 2014

They say not to do in filmmaking as the audience will find it distracting. Unless of course the director feels their is a purpose. But I am having trouble distinguishing where the line is drawn exactly. Here's a scene where the rule is considered broken, at 2:00 into the scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wN6TPtaBKwk

Here is also scene where the camera does the same thing, cut from 180 degrees from one side to the other, at 5:05 into the scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w16S-EOP-os

However the first one is probably considered more 'unacceptable in most storyboard set ups, compared to the second example. Why is that? Where is the line drawn, so I know what types of shots it's okay to do it in, compared to ones, where it is not? Is it more acceptable to break the rule when it comes to cutting between close ups, compared to two mastershots as well?

mad_hatter · Aug 27, 2014

I can't watch the second video in my country...

But in the first, there is no "180-degree-rule" break. It's not even relevant here. In a 2 shot, such as this, the two characters offer relation to each other; you know who's looking where and who they're talking to. You could cut to any angle in this scene and so long as both characters remain in the shot, there'd be no confusion.

Does this scene look confusing to you?

harmonica44 · Aug 27, 2014

I am working with a filmmaking collaborator, storyboarding his documentary, and he said they are crossing the line and it looked jarring to him. That's why I took it as a 180 degree rule break, cause he thought so. They also talk about it in tutorials, such as this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HinUychY3sE

In the tutorial, they say not to cross the line once it's established, but this movie is doing it back and forth. So I was wondering how this movie made an acception? Even in that tutorial, the actors are still looking at each other, and they still say NOT to cross the line.

cheeseandachallenge · Aug 27, 2014

As Mad Hatter said, the crossing of the line in The Shining example doesn't make the story hard to follow. We see where the characters in relation to their environment and one another. But it is still jarring, because suddenly the characters are standing on opposite sides of the screen. I don't see why this would be unacceptable, though? It's pretty apparent that it's intentional in order to unsettle the viewer with such a jarring cut. If it was a normal dialogue scene in a rom com film, you (probably) don't want to jar and unsettle the viewer - but here it is done with a purpose that serves the film - without making the scene confusing.

I don't see where they cross the line in the second?

harmonica44 · Aug 27, 2014

Well the in the tutorial I posted, they say to only place the camera on the opposite angle of the room, if you do a camera movement to that place. Cause if you just cut from one to other, it will be disorienting.

mad_hatter · Aug 27, 2014

I don't consider that cut in the Shining to be "jarring". I think it works just fine. Rightly or wrongly, I think the editor has just chosen to cut to a second 2 shot, from the other side, simply to better show the reaction to Jacks previous statement.

H44, that tutorial is pretty good, but nowhere does it talk about 2 shots, establishing shots, masters... They are referring only to the OTS shots of the people talking to each other. That's where you can break the 180 degree rule, which is what you want to avoid.

Sweetie · Aug 27, 2014

They say not to do in filmmaking as the audience will find it distracting. Unless of course the director feels their is a purpose.

It can distract the audience as they're accustomed to certain "grammar" when it comes to editing and filmmaking. There are times when it's right, and there are times when there just aren't any better alternatives due to coverage.

But I am having trouble distinguishing where the line is drawn exactly.

Take it like this. Two actors are talking to each other. Draw a straight line between them and then extend it well past them on both sides. Pick a place where you put the camera. The camera is on one side of the line. Don't place the camera on another side of the line. While it's a simplistic way to look at it and there are plenty of methods of getting around it, that is the basics of where the line is drawn.

It can get a little more complicated when you introduce more and more actors to the scene with differing interaction, movements and altering camera angles.

Here's a scene where the rule is considered broken, at 2:00 into the scene:

The line was broken in this example where it forces you to re-examine the scene to work out who is where.

Here is also scene where the camera does the same thing, cut from 180 degrees from one side to the other, at 5:05 into the scene:

It came close to the line, though it didn't break it. If the guy was looking to the right of the camera at 5:05, the line would have been slightly (technically) broken.

Will Vincent · Aug 27, 2014

mad_hatter, to say there is no break, is totally incorrect. It's there. It may not be jarring but it's absolutely a line break.

In the shining, yes the line IS broken.. but it's done so purposely.. Out of context it might just look like a mistake. But in context of the whole story, Grady is the former caretaker that went nuts and killed his family.. now, Jack is the caretaker, and will ultimately attempt the same.

Crossing the line, places the characters into the same physical space, which subconsciously informs the viewer of the similarity, and foreshadows later events.

The shining can hardly be taken at face value, really any kubrick film for that matter. There is a lot of other meaning throughout, lots of subcontext, etc.

What this Is however a good example of is to show that while there are rules, and this is an example of breaking the rules -- Kubrick knew the rules, and chose to break them for effect.

This is precisely why it's important to KNOW the rules, so that you can CHOOSE to break them.. not just go do whatever the hell you want without real motivation for it. Film is a language, language has syntax.. Syntax is a set of rules, and sometimes those rules may be broken -- for effect. But if you can't properly conjugate a sentence in the first place, nobody is going to know what the hell you're trying to say.

mad_hatter · Aug 27, 2014

Will Vincent said:
mad_hatter, to say there is no break, is totally incorrect. It's there. It may not be jarring but it's absolutely a line break.

I appreciate what you're saying, and I understand that, yes, technically you are correct. There is a line break which causes the characters to face the opposite direction to how they were before the cut.

But, I wasn't so much saying that the line wasn't broken, more that the "rule" wasn't broken. I'd argue that the "rule", in that scene, is not really even there to be broken. The fact that we know which way the characters are facing in relation to each other at all times negates the "rule".

The reason we're told to not break the rule is because it's jarring and confusing. Since this example is none of those things, surely, the "rule" cannot have been broken?

In any case, absolutely, always best to know and follow the rules, until you figure out how and when you can break those rules, and get away with it.

Sweetie · Aug 27, 2014

The reason we're told to not break the rule is because it's jarring and confusing. Since this example is none of those things, surely, the "rule" cannot have been broken?

For what it's worth, that cut in question in the Shining was jarring for me.

Will Vincent · Aug 27, 2014

mad_hatter said:
But, I wasn't so much saying that the line wasn't broken, more that the "rule" wasn't broken.

I guess I was confused when you said this...

mad_hatter said:
there is no "180-degree-rule" break

mad_hatter said:
I'd argue that the "rule", in that scene, is not really even there to be broken. The fact that we know which way the characters are facing in relation to each other at all times negates the "rule".

In which case I'd probably argue that your understanding of the 180 rule is flawed.

The 180 degree rule, specifically is about not crossing the line. So, any cross of the line, whether it looks jarring or not is breaking the line, thus breaking the rule.

When it's not a break, is when the line changes.. for example, a character moves, or a new character joins the scene creating a new line.

mad_hatter said:
In any case, absolutely, always best to know and follow the rules, until you figure out how and when you can break those rules, and get away with it.

More or less, yeah.. learn the rules, and when you've learned them you can make the informed choice to ignore them.

mad_hatter · Aug 28, 2014

Will Vincent said:
I guess I was confused when you said this...

You’ve quoted me saying the same thing twice, then acted like I’ve contradicted myself. I think you may have confused yourself....

Will Vincent said:
…your understanding of the 180 rule is flawed.

You know what, you may be right. :lol:

I’ve only ever really considered this as a rule when referring to a person interacting with another person, or an object, where only one subject is in shot at a time. In those instances, when the rule is broken, it’s confusing. But, I’ve never really considered it in regards to a 2-shot, such as that in the clip from The Shining. But still, as I think about it, and watch that clip, this works. The cut establishes a new line, but the rule is never really brought into play. If this were cut more often, we’d most likely have a problem.

At worst, I’d say the rule is bent here, not broken.

Sweetie · Aug 28, 2014

The cut establishes a new line

It doesn't establish a new line. The line is still there. In the same place. You've just moved to the other side of the line.

It doesn't mean there is a problem with the scene. It just means the line was crossed. Which means the 180 deg rule was broken.

SixOhThree · Aug 28, 2014

Like most rules of filmmaking, the 180 degree rule needs to exist so that a novice filmmaker has a guideline. Same goes with continuity - too many continuity errors can really be distracting, but I love how Scorcese intentionally leaves minor continuity errors in his films without distracting the viewer.

cheeseandachallenge · Aug 28, 2014

By definition the 180 degree rule was broken - there isn't any argument about that here. Breaking a rule for a purpose doesn't mean that the rule wasn't broken, it just means that it's not a bad thing to do so.

A cut doesn't establish a new line. As explained characters moving in the space can re-establish the line. Similarly, camera movement can re-establish the line of action - e.g. if the camera had tracked from it's first position, behind one of the characters, into it's final position.

David.rhsc · Aug 28, 2014

As long as you have clearly established the scene's geography and use either movement, action, or (most commonly and most effectively) an actor's eyes to move the line of action about the room, you can "cross the line" all you like.

It might be worth checking out this book (for anyone with these sorts of questions):

http://www.amazon.com/Film-Directing-Shot-Visualizing-Productions/dp/0941188108

harmonica44 · Aug 29, 2014

Okay thanks for the advice. Here's a scene I found to cross the line perhaps, and I found it very disorienting, at 44 seconds into the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OEhiTHJ0EA

In the first two shots We see Carlo (guy in orange clothes), on the side of the street. But then the movie cuts to another shot, which was taken from all the way from across the street, from a different diagonal position, when the car pulls up.

It looks like the car is pulling up, across the street from where Carlo is, and that it suppose to be Carlo's point of view. But it is actually the same side of the street as Carlo. I had to watch this scene twice cause it was disorienting how the director crossed the line, or so it seemed. Does it count as crossing the line here, or was the rule broken appropriately?

wheatgrinder · Aug 31, 2014

That shinning example was awesome.. Will total deconstructed that for me and it was brilliant.

That last example from the GF is a scene cut. The 180 rule applies to a scene, not between scenes.. after :44 seconds its all on the same side of the line, just as the camera was always on the same side of the line when in the apartment... ????

In my experience Keeping the 180 rule makes everybody's job easier on set and particularly in editing. Sometimes its hard to remember what exactly your shooting, when your shooting out of order etc.. so sticking to that RULE keeps you from making odd looking shots.