Hi, I'm not a film maker, but I am a game developer. This was really educational for me because I have to be aware of camera placement and what not in cutscenes. Thanks!
I suddenly realized, by learning about this rule, why film making devices interest me so much--it seems like the same rules kind of apply to visual storytelling in general, including graphic art and comics.
Another great and informative video! I honestly didn't know anything about this rule, but now I can see how effective breaking it can be, both good and bad. Your use of clips, visuals, and explanations makes it so entertaining to learn something new about film-making. Thanks!
i think scene construction is not for people to notice but create something that will set a specific mood and feel for the viewer to perceive unconsciously.
The most important thing videos like this leave out is. The 180 degree rule is great for editing. But when shooting you just take every angle you can get. So much time is wasted on discussion weather an angle is good or bad or can be used. Just do it. But be sure to have your masters.
Excellent video!! I think this is one of the best videos I've found on something related to filmmaking. I also really appreciate how you used the little "ding" and red circle to point out every time a scene broke the rule because my untrained eye would probably have missed a lot of those lol
This is super interesting, even for people who aren't making films. It makes watching cinema less passive and more actively aware of what's happening, and why things work (or don't).
One of my favorite examples of breaking this was in the 2003 FMA in the conversation between Edward and Dante. They use so many different camera angles, everything from spinning around the characters to fish-eye, completely obliterating the 180-degree rule, and it works perfectly because their conversation is entirely about analyzing life philosophically and it's an argument back and forth as to which perspective is right. As they change perspectives and power, the camera angles change and twist around until the audience is just as dizzy as Edward feels by end of the conversation.
The best example of this, I think, is the example that was used last in X-Men First Class. The first time I saw that movie, it was so jarring that I physically jumped!
Oh, never mind. I was reading comments while watching. But yeah, me too. I was already surprised that they started the movie in a concentration camp but then that reveal really shocked me and set a bar for the rest of the movie.
HEAT has a very similar scene as your WALK THE LINE example. Neil is at the counter reading and Eady begins asking him about his book. When he gets too defensive, the camera rotates around Eady, and Neil apologizes and opens up to her.
I think many people notice the small details but on a subconscious level even though they don't know what makes them feel certain ways about certain movies and or scenes consciously. Likewise how the 180 rule and other rules in film it feels natural to the viewers but they don't know why if they had to answer.
There's a great one in Ex Machina. Two-person outdoor scene with Domhnall Gleeson and Oscar Isaac. Master establishes the setting, then reverse mid-shots crossing the line with each cut. Alex Garland's directorial debut so I'm not sure whether he just didn't know about the rule or intentionally flouted it; either way, it works.
There’s a really good scene in Daredevil season 3 between Karen and Fisk in which the camera shifts across the line two distinct times in order to reflect changes in the conversation. It starts with Karen trying to push Fisk to an emotional response, then the camera shifts as Fisk takes control of the conversation, then it shifts back to the original placement when Karen tries to push him yet again in a more extreme way.
Another great 180 break is in Parasite. When the poor daughter is talking to the rich mother it breaks the line and presides to match cut between them. Representing who she broke the mother's world and she helps her literally see eye to eye with her.
It's interesting you mention Satoshi again at the end after using it as the first example. It didn't feel jarring at all the first time you showed it (while the later examples definitely did) and I didn't even consider why that might be until you dropped the bomb later in the video. I quite like this content so thank you Algorithm for showing me you.
I never thought about this but now that I have it makes total sense (I mean I have thought about the looking left and right part but not about the camera rotating on an axis).
My brain loves it when the 180 degree rule is broken. I really, really hate how artists have convinced themselves they have to draw in the lines to get respect from audiences. You're a fucking artist. Fuck the 180 degree rule.
When characters are in movement facing the same direction, you have to axis the action axis between characters and the travel axis, so there is a change of camara within the travel axis line, so not really breaking the rule
I knew the rules, I knew what I was suppose to do but I didn't, I was compelled to break that rule. The character spun on a bar stool and while she spun around I put my camera to the complete other side while she spun from bartender POV to patron POV. Cutting on action help lessen the confusion.
my immediate thought about the edit ~@2:55 was that an assumed 'original' take continued on that arc but was unusable so another take was spliced in - 'cos surely they wouldn't want to do that _on purpose_ ...
So basically...to really *dumb* it down... you've just got to know left from your right. For example: If an actor/actress is facing right in one camera angle, he/she must still look like they're facing the same way when shot from another camera angle.
Great video. Consider me subscribed. I'd love more videos on "film techniques" and "history" as well. I like this, because it shows a catalog of sensible design indices.
There's a great example of this in Parasite when Jessica tells Mrs. Choi "Did something happen to Da-song in the first grade". Mrs. Choi gasps and the camera does this really obvious pan behind Jessica's head, and from then on the 180 degree rule is broken
I was watching a movie recently(I don't remember which one) and it was heavily dialogue based and about half of the scenes I saw were a boring shot/reverse shot, but you could tell that they tried to make it more interesting sometimes so they just shat on the 180 rule and it was so disorienting that I didn't even get through the whole movie. I wish I could remember what it was, but I was at a friend's house and didn't think to ask about the title🤷
It does apply when there is just one character, because if the one character walks there is an axis, if you break it the character walks the opposite way. And its like in the Her example, he is alone and the change of side means something
There are two lines tho and a shot can be set up for either line The scene at 4:23 was set up where the relevant axis is actually perpendicular to the standard axis it breaks the leter of the rule but not the spirit.
Yes, I probably didn't explain that very well. It's a shot that is on (or close to) the 180 Degree Line. So using a shot like that can ease the scene over to the other side. The Shining doesn't actually use a neutral shot, it's just perfectly flat, so crossing the line on those types of shots is better than crossing on two conflicting angles.
I've always been of the opinion that you can break the 180 degree rule for any reason you damn well please. Just as long as that reason is in fact any actual reason and not some clumsy whim that's going to ruin your editor's life later. And if it must suck, at least it sucks deliberately.
