crossing the line between scenes

HerzogisGod

HerzogisGod

Well-known member
Within a scene you should not cross the line.

How about between scenes? should the line be considered when planning out sequences within a film? going from the end of one scene to the beginning of another.

Will a film have a more cohesive quality as a whole if you consider the line between scenes? I haven't spent much time studying the great directors on this point to see what they do. I will start paying attention to this in the works of Kubrick, Scorsese, and the like

I know rules are made to be broken and they are broken all time with much success.

Just wondering what they teach in "film school" and books as the correct way
 
What do you mean by line? The 180 rule? If so, you can break it without loosing your audience by either having a character to quickly respond or see something outside the 180. Or by having a transition shot(s) to slowly revolve the scene around.
 
Just consider how the last frame of the scene interacts with the first frame of the next scene. In other words, plan your transitions. A transition can be as simple as a straight cut but those frames still relate to each other visually, even if you're not doing some kind of dolly/lens wipe. That's how I try to approach it anyway.
 
HerzogisGod said:
Within a scene you should not cross the line.

How about between scenes? should the line be considered when planning out sequences within a film? going from the end of one scene to the beginning of another.

I know rules are made to be broken and they are broken all time with much success.

Just wondering what they teach in "film school" and books as the correct way
Click to expand...



I'm not aware of a "line" that exists between different scenes. That kind of thing would be up to the filmmaker and I tend to work these things out with storyboards. That kind of thing is more of a aesthetic decision rather than a more purely mechanical issue.

Certain rules are definitely not "meant to be broken" in my opinion. Once you have a command of the rules and the craft, then you can think about futzing around with the rules, but even then, I'd say, there are better rules to break.

.
 
The Big Parade...hmm

Okay, so I'm not totally crazed with this idea. Because it seems to make some sense in a highly technical, neurotic, controlled kind of way.
 
As the people in this thread have said, the 180 rule is not set in stone. I will add however that I find following this rule to be very usefull, at least in the planning/shooting stages of production. I personally hate the awkwardness and Clumsy feeling that jumping from side of the line to the other creates.

My advice would be to watch 'Titanic'- as well as a few other films I studied this movie when finding ways to cheat myself over the line.
Get a peice of paper and pencil and draw as many scenes as you want from a birds eye view perspective, drawing lines (180 line) between the actors heads. I also drew the camera placements in these basic blueprints. Everytime a character engaged in conversation with another, a different line was made.:beer:

You will find it is not as complicated as you think. All you have to do is make sure you have enough options at your disposal at the editing phase. You can get around it no problem if you edit it right but you have to have the shots you need at hand. I like to block out scenes following this rule and then doing a coverage shoot so that I have those 'spare parts' in my garage :p

In short, look at it this way. You can cross the line whenever the viewer see's
a subject from a neutral position ( on the line )
So to cross the line or set a new one you have to at some point SHOW, in a shot, a 'dead on' (ish') frame of the actor/subject on this line - either from behind, above, in front etc.

In one scene of 'Titanic' the last frame of the a shot was of Jacks back as he turns and runs off before it then cuts to a shot at the other side of the line (perhaps even a new line). This could have also of been a few frames of him from in front or above.
In theory as long as you show some sort of angle, ON or CROSSING this line before the switch it seems to blend well into the next shot.

Of course, I may be talking out my A**hole with all this and there may be a more simple, logical or perhaps even more complex explanation in contrast to my own but this works well for me.

Tony Scott's movies seem to cheat over the line with almost 'RANDOM' shots, close ups, transitions etc and it all works well. If it looks right then it is but you wanna make sure you have enough footage or at least some planning so that you dont have to think about it in editing.

Overall I say crossing the line usually wont work when you jump onto the other side of it for no reason; if there is a specific intention, it tends to just work.
 
Last edited:
Rules are the best things to break.
I have found those who were never told bogus rules hesitate much less than those who listened as some dude told em what never to do.
This is what is bad about any school for art. Techniques should be taught... not limitations.

I have gone out of my way to keep my little artists away from these limiting elements. As a result, they are completely uninhibited when creating... the way an artist otta be.

In a creative setting, the first thing somebody should do when told "ya can't do this" is to do it.
 
As long as you understand why the rule is there (viewer confusion, jarring juxtapositions etc.), then you can break it if you like, and see whether those problems are...well...problems. Lots of filmmakers have broken the "line" rule. Apparently, most didn't know they shouldn't have, but some did, and succeeded anyway : )
 
the rule is sensible, "play it safe" type rule - like "don't run with scissors". You don't need to obey it slavishly, but be aware of the types of issues it might bring up.

Sometimes crossing the line leads to jump cut, more often not
Sometimes jump cut is fine, more often not.

In 2008 confusing the viewer is not so easy, boring the viewer is much bigger problem.

Give it a name - intensity vs. harmony. Tense vs bland maybe - but not right vs wrong.
 
there's a lot of talk about rules being made to be broken here but there is no line rule to rebel against between scenes.

Unless of course you are counting continuous scenes such as someone's in the house (scene 1), then they walk out through the door into the back yard (scene 2). If the action is meant to be seen as continious - one scene really - then yes you should maintain the line, and screen direction unless you have a good reason for breaking the rule or just want to, but you will be breaking it.

to go with the rules are made to be broken thing, you should really fully understand WHY the rule came into existence and what the supposed effect of breaking the rule is.

Basically the rule comes from the fact that you sit in a theater watching an image a the front of the theater the same way you watch a play on a proscenium arch or end stage (stage in front of the audience only). When you are watching a play in those theaters, or even in an arena theater or thrust or alley, you see everything from one side of the line only unless you change your seat in arena, thrust or alley and move to the other side of the stage. The reason you don't want to change to the otherside of the line during a scene is because perceptionwise it's like picking up the entire audience and setting them on the other side of the stage. Now they are suddenly seeing everything from a different angle. Therein lies the power of intentionally crossing the line as a tool and the danger of creating disorientation by doing it accidently or willy nilly. Screen direction is the most important thing, but crossing the line can be jarring without foreground or background objects to clearly delineate what's where.

So within a scene that's why it's a rule. But between scenes everything is a fresh slate. In the live theater the curtain may come down and an entirely new set may be in place for the next scene. I've seen several plays where they crossed the line in a way at intermission, by flipping the set to the reverse view. So the aydience was quite literally on the otherside of the line from the first act. But with an act or a scene change it's a fresh slate. The cinema audience knows that they are in a new environment and will have to orient themselves within the scene.

So there may be aesthetic or style reasons to stay on oneside of the line from scene to scene or not - because it will make the cut cool or effective in some way, but there is absolutely no rule about it one way or the other when it comes to crossing the line bewteen scenes. It's a stylistic / story telling choice that's up to you if you even want to bother to think about it. But it's not potentially disorienting to an audience unles you intentionally make it so somehow (like they don't know it's a new scene) and won't feel like or be seen as a "mistake" or even breaking the rules.
 
grinner said:
Rules are the best things to break.
I have found those who were never told bogus rules hesitate much less than those who listened as some dude told em what never to do.
This is what is bad about any school for art. Techniques should be taught... not limitations.

I have gone out of my way to keep my little artists away from these limiting elements. As a result, they are completely uninhibited when creating... the way an artist otta be.

In a creative setting, the first thing somebody should do when told "ya can't do this" is to do it.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

The rebelling is great, but honestly, if you don't know why you're doing it, you're probably going to end up with footage that cuts together poorly and not understand why.

Ever seen a student or indie film where someone didn't know the Rule (oh god, there's that word again) of Thirds? It's painful to watch, the framing is horrible, things are in the center of the frame, panning shots lookg like the person is pushing the frame with their nose, it's bad.

The 180 degree rule (and related: the 30 degree rule) are there for the audience. The best example of this rule is a train speeding down the tracks. If your first shot is on one side of the train as it speeds from Left to Right and your second shot is from the other side of the train, traveling from Right to Left, then the audience won't see one train traveling down the tracks. They will see two trains about to collide.


To the OP:

Different scenes don't hold the same 180 line. This is especially true for scenes with different characters, because you need to establish a line. New characters needs that master shot (etc.) to show the audience point A and point B on your line. It's helpful to think of the different things that "reset" your line. Neutral shots, overhead shots (great for large groups of people, Spielberg used to do shots through ceiling fans of kitchen tables, so he could hop the line), and dollying across the line can work to reset the line and allow you to jump it.
 
The most important thing to keep in mind is that the line is there to ground the audience into the geography of the space that is being photographed. It's very important to keep them oriented so they can understand who is talking, who they are talking to, where they are looking.... these are the principles of screen direction. Since this is mainly related to a specific space and time I don't think it matters if you change the line if you move on to another space and time.
 
Line jumping always hits me in the face when I see a movie.
The line jump in "A Beautyful Mind" was a real mean one.

They seem to have some problems in that scene, cause the next cut is has a real strange look. Like they replaced the background in post on a shot that was not ment for that plus using some wild fake DOF.
That realy thorw me out of the story.

Frank
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top