

In the scene from Wall-E the director did not break any of the rules.
Let us first look to the Rule of Thirds. In each shot the focal points clearly met up with AT LEAST one of the four intersections created by the imaginary divisions., or were framed by theThe 30 degree rule is hard to stipulate on, mostly due to the scene cutting to different areas. It wouldn’t be hard to believe that we’re only seeing Eva every five minutes. The background she is in is so general and so unspecific that we can’t tell whether or not the camera is moving 30 degrees or just changing locations all together. The second and third shots are continuous, and they do follow the 30 degree rule.
The 180 Degree Rule is followed in all instances. In shots two and three it is followed, but just barely, as the camera movies exactly 180 degrees or maybe slightly less. Between 3 and 4 it is followed because we cut away to a Wall-E who is watching silently from behind garbage. Because these are all mostly cuts to something outside the scene (as we couldn’t see Wall-E before shot 4, so we broke no lines to see him, and we can’t truly even tell exactly where he would have been), the 180 degree rule is followed.
I think the directing talent in the scene is spectacular. Besides being visually appealing to watch, the cuts and the mysteries angles, as well as the moving in and off-screen really set up a sense of mystery. We’re just as curious as Wall-E is by the end of the scene of what Eva is. Could the rules have been broken? Maybe, but it wouldn’t really have accomplished much except continue to tangle up the shots, which due to the cuts are already pretty tangled. Also if the rule of thirds was not followed, then we might have lost Wall-E and Eva in the trash. So the director’s choice to follow the rules was not only to make the movie more visually appealing and make the story flow in order to peak our curiosity, but it was also mandatory in order to better see the characters.

