Putting the camera over the 180 degree line?

[Chachi]

The action line/axis, 180 degree rule, whatever, you know what I mean... when you can only position a camera to one side of the line of action... when shooting a conversation, what's the point to putting it on the wrong side? I've noticed that Kubrick did it with the drill instructor yelling at the cadets in Full Metal Jacket, and I've also noticed Wong Kar Wai likes to do it a lot.

[Themovieman44]

I feel sometimes, people just want to spice things up a bit, make you feel more involved in the conversation. It all depends on the artist, Baz Lurhman did it a time or two as well in his films.

[foxwood]

they could be doing it to give the coversation a jarring effect, or to make the audeance to feel uneasy, about the conversation, by simply changing a convention. It all depends on the sequence really.

[ipon70]

I think it is a matter of preference. I would cut it how you want have someone watch it and see if they get lost in the transitions. Make sure you shoot both ways, one the way you want and then one the "right" way, so if you have to you can go to that footage. Its kind of like a lot of people say you should show the face of the actor talking not someone else or the back of their head...but recent shows have shown that it doesn't seem to matter anymore (desperate housewives).
One thing I have found helps when you have to do it, is use a break shot, like maybe a close up of the actors face then cut, or maybe a wide shot of them sitting or standing there off to the side you want to shoot from, then cut to the closer shot.

Just some ideas.

[Gyro]

The idea behind the 180 degree rule is to not confuse the audience as to who's talking to who. If you've established this through a wide shot and keep the eye line correct I think you should feel free to throw in a few artistic angles.

[Raptor]

It's not only for conversation, but for action... the big chase scene Guy1 enters frame from left runs off to right - followed by gy 2 who also enters left - now cross the line as guy2 exits frame and he exits left. Hmmm did guy 1 turn around and start chasing him? Ipon is right tho, the correct way to cross the line is to insert a cutaway - usually a tight shot on something that doesn't communicate the feel of the line you cross. It's the same trick to avoid a jump cut - both are jaing to the audience and tend to take their attention away from 'what is happening' to 'what just happened'. Pick an object in the scene but not critical to the current context - glass on a table, avoid something in the talents hands or anything that will communicate the change of view. Watch the news for how cutaways are used. At a crime scene it may be a 3 second close up on scene tape- at a fire or accident, a closeup on a redlight, fire department logo on an engine door, bystanders face - anything unrelated so the audience doesn't suddenly see something facing the 'wrong' way.

[2nd_Recon]

If done correctly, you can break the 180 rule easilly, they made it a rule because people ruin perfectly good films by not doing it right.

[ipon70]

If you watch our movie Potato Gun, we break that rule all over the place...but I bet you never notice. Its all in how you excute and edit it together.

[Ornsack]

If you ever watch Bam Margera's 'Haggard' you'll see that you can break the rule horribly. I say stick to it until you know what you're doing

[ipon70]

If you ever watch Bam Margera's 'Haggard' you'll see that you can break the rule horribly. I say stick to it until you know what you're doing

Quality TV at its finest......lol

[2nd_Recon]

such a funny movie lol

[Raptor]

LOL, I don't think Bam is quite the ultimate role model for production values LOL...

[crb]

the 180 rule which is called the line of action is for action. Then there's the eye line. Same basic thing. When you shoot from one angle you can't jump to the opposite side in the action. It makes the audience think that the charecter ran left then right which in fact is was just the camera that changed direction, not the actor. You do it to not confuse the audience, unless confussion is what you're into.

[Caveman]

They broke the 180 rule in King Arthur... didn't work I don't think - it wasn't glaringly bad (I can see what they were trying to do but it wasn't paying off).

So even the pros get that one wrong

[crb]

If you watch the movie Patch Adams the graduation scene they broke the rule too, and made a confussing shot. But with 180 minute film, they break rules alot, but with it being 180 minutes you have a tendency not to notice as much of the mistakes.
I was always told in school and also in the books to keep the rules unless you can give a good reason to break the rules.

[jcdenton]

In the series "24" featuring sutherland they break the rule a lot. It fit's in the whole series style. The whole thing is pretty confusing if you're not a "24" Expert. there's a bomb, some terrorists and an afroamerican president, that's all I know. And it seems like this plot is the same in all series, kind of a neverending story.
Anyway, the style including image in image and parallel story telling etc. allows to break the 180° rule without any further introductions. (the series utilizes confusion as a stimulus, probably because it lacks of it elsewhere)

Personally I would not break it unless it' neccessary because in a conversation I want the audience to follow the story without to notice any cuts at all.
It may be easier to break the rule when you use nonlinear audio cutting: Actor A is still talking while you cut the video (breaking the 180° rule) and show actor B still listening and then answering or so.