Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

The Interview- shot on MX

Yup, you def crossed the line. The characters should maintain what side of the screen they're on as well as screen direction. Its the 180 degree rule, Film 101, literally.

All things aside, great quality!
 
I'm relieved- I thought you meant I offended someone. Yeah, I definitely crossed, but that's the least of the technical mistakes made.
 
Vladimir Eugene said:
I'm relieved- I thought you meant I offended someone. Yeah, I definitely crossed, but that's the least of the technical mistakes made.
Click to expand...

I've seen a few films lately cross the line. I wonder if that is going to be an outdated convention one day. Keeping in mind that originally films would show people full body so as not to confuse the audience that they were not floating heads. Editorially they would show someone leaving a building, getting into transportation, arriving, going into the next place so as not to confuse the audience about location. but the sophistication of the viewer is pretty advanced I'm curious what "rules" will fall by the way side over time.
 
the line cross bugged the hell out of me, but otherwse I thought it was compelling and looked attractive.

but seriously, that line cross is gross! I'd at least try to mirror th young guy's close ups. I wouldn't let that go out like that, personally.
 
This is not quite the same as Ozu crossing the line -- and it serves no purpose here. Ozu also shot exclusively with a 50mm lens in long takes, so this would make those "leaps" less distracting.

In this case it was simply a mistake, which Vladimir acknowledged. Crossing the line sometimes can be disguised, mitigated, but it is rarely expressive and is usually done out of ignorance or poor filmic grammar or missed coverage. There is a lot of poor filmic grammar out there that doesn't add anything but is justified by people who are usually just unschooled. People get used to a lot of ugly sloppy stuff, but that doesn't mean it should be encouraged -- and this would greatly confuse an audience and take them out of the film. (One of the worst and commonplace cases of this is in moving car CU dialogue scenes -- the background moving in opposing directions! Yikes! But even big name guys do this fairly often.)

Anyway, crossing the line in a two party dialogue scene conventionally filmed is a non-starter. I doubt this rule, which has very good reasons behind it, is going away.
 
I went back and took a look. True, if I had coverage, I would not have used some of the takes I did for this short; but, I don't feel crossing the line is always taboo.

On the medium shots of both actors, yes- I think those were no nos, but on the singles or skimming shoulders with a medium close up- I don't feel the non filmmaking audience will pick up on it.

I agree with Mark, on that the audience may not have to be led from one destination to another step by step.

Nor do you have to do pan across the line before you can go across on singles, without taking people away from the story. Sure, for conversations are not the best examples, but for actions sequences, I think they do it intentionally to add excitement.

Mine were done out of lack of coverage, and stitching two stories together, and an actor that had to leave before my camera went off.
 
Come on now! Acting is great, but this edit is not competent and camera blocking/lighting etc are totally sub par, even by student film standards. You break rules for a reason, not just to be "creative".

Go to film school. Call us after you graduate.
 
nice topic ....

... crossing the line, is a technique. it can be used to have an effect. the effect being irritation or confusion or style. when done well, the attention is not on "the shot" but on the action. the crossing adds something unconscious. in any case, it would probably be carefully planned in advance or discovered by a talented editor. It would definitely not happen in each cut, but at a very specific moment ...

It would be motivated by a story telling twist of some kind. We should remember, that film is not a technical rule book art form.
it works on many levels and those want to be connected.

not crossing the line, is good practice since it works. but it comes with a sister.
it is not only the 180° in physical space, that should not be crossed, there are lines in the composition, too.

the 180° would not help a bit, if the composition would be weak and there would not be a spacial inner shot connection between the players.

so, composition as in placement and looks trump the 180°.

In dialogue, where the players are headed towards each other, the prolonged eye lines must cross or overlap which AUTOMATICALLY happens when following the (max) 180° rule AND placing the actors in the composition on the respective left and right of an imaginary line AND having them look into the respective "other" side.


In conclusion, i would never recommend to just follow "the rules", because it is done so all the time. but rather go and study the "why" of the rule. there are no rules, if it works.

After all, art comes from breaking out of the rules.

Guess that was the point that got me going and share this,
hope it helps
:-)

Detlev
 
wow, you guys are really sensitive about the rules; I saw nothing wrong here, actually the fact that the shots came from a less suspected position was nice. I don't want to take the thread away from this little piece, but if you want to consider bad and distracting stuff: I saw Alice in Wonderland yesterday: beside the stupid story and the fact that some of the compositions were borrowed from Lord of the Rings, what was really distracting was most of the 3d; I haven't seen Avatar yet, so this is my first 3d in a long time, and most of it was very unconvincing, but worse, the fact that most of the time you don't really see 3d but layers moving in front of each other took me out of the story. "crossing the line" in Vladimir's piece was no problem whatsoever to me, if you want to compare distracting stuff
 
Detlev Eller said:
nice topic ....

... crossing the line, is a technique. it can be used to have an effect. the effect being irritation or confusion or style. when done well, the attention is not on "the shot" but on the action. the crossing adds something unconscious. in any case, it would probably be carefully planned in advance or discovered by a talented editor. It would definitely not happen in each cut, but at a very specific moment ...

It would be motivated by a story telling twist of some kind. We should remember, that film is not a technical rule book art form.
it works on many levels and those want to be connected.

not crossing the line, is good practice since it works. but it comes with a sister.
it is not only the 180° in physical space, that should not be crossed, there are lines in the composition, too.

the 180° would not help a bit, if the composition would be weak and there would not be a spacial inner shot connection between the players.

so, composition as in placement and looks trump the 180°.

In dialogue, where the players are headed towards each other, the prolonged eye lines must cross or overlap which AUTOMATICALLY happens when following the (max) 180° rule AND placing the actors in the composition on the respective left and right of an imaginary line AND having them look into the respective "other" side.


In conclusion, i would never recommend to just follow "the rules", because it is done so all the time. but rather go and study the "why" of the rule. there are no rules, if it works.

After all, art comes from breaking out of the rules.

Guess that was the point that got me going and share this,
hope it helps
:-)

Detlev
Click to expand...

I think: follow the rules unless there is a reason - if you break them for no reason, you are simply drawing attention to the camera, and away from teh story, for no reason. Hitchcock followed the rules 99% of the time, if he hadn't that last %1 would have been lost in a jumble of random "creative" directing. I love it when beginners think they are more talented and visionary than Hitchcock, Spielberg, etc. all.
 
The edit for the most part should be invisible. The emotional or action shifts should generally support the storyline. When the edit or in this case 'the line cross' draws to much audience attention to itself and causes the screen geography has to be recalculated during key dialogue moments, story is lost.

Crossing the line very, very rarely improves storytelling.

But the MX looked great!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top