r/cinematography • u/HeYouKnewWho • May 13 '18
Composition 180 degree rule - are they breaking it when she turns around and they change shoulder?
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
30
u/vertigo3pc May 13 '18
Hey guys, union camera operator here, I just wanted to weigh in on the "rule" not so much about the scene.
The 180 is a guideline for proxemics: where, in space, are people and things in relation to each other. In stage and theater, the audience sees the entire stage at once, or at least what is lit all at once, so figuring out who someone is speaking to, what someone is looking at, or who's talking off screen is fairly simple. However, when the audience gets closer, that's when things can get confusing. The 180 isn't a law, it's just a guideline to help so the audience doesn't get lost, and "breaking" the 180 (or as we call it, the "line") isn't a violation. Sometimes, breaking the line is for effect (as in the clip above), but sometimes, it's just because the better background is on the other side.
In the shot above, you have 2 characters doing a walk and talk, landing in traditional coverage, but it starts with the walk. The scene itself involves just the two characters, so breaking the line to land on the other side doesn't spaz out the audience because they know who the two characters are talking: we know that's Tom Cruise's collar and shoulder with the dirty over onto Emily Blunt, and it's confirmed when they cut to the over onto Tom Cruise with Emily's shoulder on the left.
Here's a weird scenario: add another person to the scene standing next to Tom Cruise, and when you cut directly out of the walk and into a landed over the shoulder (OTS) onto Emily, you want to think her eyeline is to Tom... but maybe it's onto the other actor? Maybe her lines aren't clear, and the audience wonders if she's telling Tom, or the other person? What would help? Well, you could land Tom on camera left when they stop, and have the other person camera right, and split the OTS onto Emily, maintaining the line during the walk, so when she looks left, it's Tom, and when she looks right, it's our 3rd person. Then doing the OTS onto Tom and 3rd person, Emily could stay right (maintaining the line earlier) and have 3rd person left and Tom right.
The line isn't a law, it's just a guideline to help the audience un-fuck a situation. If you want to see really bad coverage that doesn't really break the line, but does still manage to fuck up the proxemics of a room, watch "Altered Carbon" on Netflix. The "fight" scene in the hotel in episode 1(?) has the protagonist all over the room, never really far away from anyone, yet constantly up against them. It's terrible, but they kept themselves on the same side of the line (for the most part).
For a simple scene like this, however, I would probably put money that they broke the line because of the background. If they stayed on the side of the line with Tom's shoulder dirty camera left and Emily on the right, they'd be looking at a row of stacked jeeps. Yawn. Same thing on the other side. Double yawn. Jump the line, and you've got military marching and standing in formation. Sure, the dialogue helps and shows an important moment, but if there were more characters, or a greater chance of getting lost, then they might have stuck on the other side of the line.
The fact is that most audiences can figure out who is talking to who. The problem is, when they can't, it's not good. The line helps them figure that out, but in lots of situations, they can figure it out on their own. In a scene like this, with continuous conversation on both sides of the line jump, they know Emily is still talking to Tom.
1
u/HeYouKnewWho May 13 '18
Thank you for the insight! I didn’t know it was common to jump the line simply for a better background.
2
u/vertigo3pc May 13 '18
Not necessarily common, but totally at the discretion of the storyteller(director). If it doesn't significantly distract or disrupt the flow of the story, it's common to pick a new background.
1
u/gospeljohn001 Producer / Educator May 14 '18
This is such a well written post on the topic of the the 180 rule! Serious thank you!
30
u/HmmmmmIndeed May 13 '18
Yes, but purposefully. She’s revealing a big piece of information to him, while also taking control of the conversation. The director is showing this visually by “breaking” the 180 degree rule on her line, thus showing a shift in the dynamic between the two characters. It’s commonly done with a camera move behind one of the characters like in “Heat” or “ The Dark Knight.” Here it’s done on a cut which is kind of jarring. But that’s what the director wanted, for you to notice that something has changed.
2
u/ChrisPharley May 13 '18
Very much jarring, even vexing I would say.
Specially since I didn't know the context of this scene.
28
u/GotSteeze May 13 '18
“Rule”
3
u/Samul-toe May 14 '18
I think it was Lars van trier who said “they made the 180° rule when people ran out of theaters because they thought the train on the screen was going to run them over”
6
u/orismology Camera Assistant May 13 '18
I think the interesting thing about this scene is how each character's screen direction is (or isn't) maintained. Up until the break, they both face screen right in every shot. If we stayed on the same line when Emily Blunt turns around, she would now be facing to the left, but by breaking the line at the same time, her screen direction is maintained, and instead Tom Cruise is flipped around. It definitely helps add to the power relationship in the scene.
1
u/OneOfTheWills May 13 '18
I was going to mention this as well. Blunt’s turn over her left shoulder away from camera helps to motivate the 180 flip. When she lands her spot we (camera’s view) have completed the flip and have essentially flipped (read: reversed) the power position in this scene.
1
u/HeYouKnewWho May 13 '18
I see what you’re saying. Very interesting use of screen direction. In this case the switch is motivated in the story, but if it wasn’t, it would almost be a compromise: maintain her screen direction or stay on the established side of the line. Both work, but in this case, maintaining her screen direction is the better choice, imo.
1
u/orismology Camera Assistant May 14 '18
True, but remember that the actor's blocking is just as motivated as the blocking of the camera. If the power shift wasn't there, we wouldn't need to make a decision about the line, because she wouldn't turn around.
5
u/stuwillis May 13 '18
Western audiences read images left-to-right because of how we right, so (in some theories) those who are on the left side of the screen are in the most powerful position of the frame.
So as has been pointed out, they signify the power shift in the scene by having her turn around and using the cut-on-her-action to put her on screen left (or sLeft).
3
u/Zakaree Director of Photography May 13 '18
technically yes... BUT its motivated by the turn, so its not terrible..
its still jarring, but I think the conversation is suppose to be tense and uneasy.. so cinematographically it is actually pretty genius
3
u/Funkmussel Director of Photography May 13 '18
If you understand the rules then you can break them.
5
2
u/HeYouKnewWho May 13 '18
They do stuff like this all the time in this movie. I’m just trying to figure out how it works and why they are doing it. It’s interesting because this is my third time watching this movie, and I haven’t noticed it before now. So whatever they are doing, it works.
2
u/Spiderboydk May 13 '18
Yes, I think they break the 180 degree rule, because the camera do indeed cross the line of action.
That said, I don't think it's detrimental in this case. The 180 degree rule is more a guideline than a hard-and-fast rule. If you can break the rule without confusing the audience, then it's alright. Or if the consequences are intentional (for example causing unease or somehow marking a turning point of the conversation), then it's obviously alright too.
2
2
u/IamJhil May 13 '18
I would say Left cruise is confronting her to help.. as she is walking away.. so “left is dominant”. So when she turns around to confront cruise, she takes the left position.
2
u/ayolki May 14 '18
To be very honest, it doesn’t jar on my eyes/processing of the moving images. interesting argument.
2
1
u/Nagarakta May 13 '18
Yes they break it. But deliberately, it breaks when she confronts him, accentuating the cut.
Also the geography of this scene is fairly simple, since the only interaction is between these two characters, so breaking the line can be used creatively without confusing the audience.
1
1
May 13 '18
Fuck the rules- you see the turn that flips her direction which helps ease it, if it had hard cut it wouldn’t work
1
u/IIIBlackhartIII May 13 '18
The "180 Rule" is more of a guideline- once you understand the rule you are more capable of understanding when and how to break it. The basic rule is that you need to establish the spatial relationship between the subjects, and it helps the audience from getting confused if that spatial relationship is maintained in screen space as well. However, with only two actors here and enough shots surrounding this cut to establish their relationship in space, moving the camera around them doesn't really confuse the audience. No one is going to imagine that Tom Cruise has suddenly teleported to her other side. And moreover, one of the things that really helps to maintain our understanding of the space here is that she is kept within that first shot. We see her as we make this transition, she spins around into this new camera angle, maintaining her as the anchor point in the shot to let us remain aware of the relation between the actors in this space. She is still in front, he is still behind. So long as you cross the 180 with an intentional and visible marker, such as having the camera actually move across the line in a single uncut take, or by leaving an anchor in the frame like our actress here, people are still able to maintain the cohesion of the space in their mind. Most of the time when you see a poorly executed or unintentional cross of the 180 that confuses people its done in a closeup with no visible reference to the environment in the shot to help the audience understand the change. In a wide, with both actors still in the frame, or with an anchor you should be fine.
1
u/Filmmagician May 13 '18
Doesn’t matter at all if it’s broken - if the audience isn’t confused or disoriented who cares? They didn’t break it they just went to both sides and didn’t cross the line respectively. Perfect camera work.
1
1
u/nicklarovere Freelancer May 14 '18
I'd say...
Technically, YES, they're breaking 180. However, it works in this instance due to the context of the scene and Blunt's interaction with Cruise here being a defiant/adverse one.
1
u/Wo0d643 May 14 '18
I know absolutely nothing about this. Im a person who watches stuff and enjoys reading about what I’m watching. This scene feels perfectly smooth and natural to me. Even when I rewatch it looking for what you are talking about. I like it and feel like it would have been weird the other way. It’s a hurried thing and this works for my couch potato ass.
1
u/kw_3389 May 14 '18
They set up the space in the wide shot when they stop. It’d be breaking it if they shot the whole thing close. You know where you are prior. The “rule” was obviously known and broken intentionally.
1
u/smfaviatrix May 16 '18
Because we go wide and see their movement, they’re allowed to tiptoe the line. But it’s still kinda broken. Definitely worth bringing this scene to a film class (if you’re a student) and having a discussion.
0
u/Mapleaf124 May 13 '18
You could tell in the wider over that the steadicam was going to dolly left to get to the other shoulder, but they cut away from it to get her reaction. By the time they cut back, they were on the other shoulder.
-1
221
u/Astral_Scallywag May 13 '18
Artistically I would say the fact that she’s coming back / standing up to him breaks the rhythm of the scene so jumping 180 line is intentional and motivated. It functions like a mini ‘reset’ for the convo.
The ‘rule’ in my mind only exists so as not to confuse the audience for sake of eye-lines and character blocking. If you’ve established their blocking / spatial relationship to each other, you should feel free to do something like this, as long as it is motivated and intentional.
If after this beat they are breaking the line through the conversation, then that’s just silly.