"that deer shot is actually very thirdsy, isn't it?"

In all honesty, I'm not going to be writing about many shows with strict script bibles. Because if you've seen one episode of CSI or NCIS, you've seen them all. But most shows have much more latitude now. I've written, for example, about Michelle MacClaren's work on both Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones, and it's…

That's fine, actually, because the relation between the character and the arbitrarily framed bit of dirt would be the same. To extend what you've said, it's a lot like taking an empty picture frame into a field on a cloudy day, holding it up and turning to the person next to you as you say, "See, it's a rabbit!" If…

We'll get to Breaking Bad too, shortly.

Wrong, Grammar Nazi. I'm altering a direct quotation from the film, so I need to indicate that I've changed not one, but two, words from the original.

In keeping with the argument of the post, I suppose I'd just ask this: are you saying that the rule applies to the initial position of the characters on screen—where they are when the scene's cut to—or the final position, when the camera stops moving? Or what if the camera doesn't stop moving, and instead circles…

"Actually understanding too much about film making can ruin film watching."

Have no fear, we'll get to The Wire soon enough.

The "rule of thirds" typically doesn't apply to film, because directors are moving your eyeballs around an ever-changing image, whereas photographers and painters are more concerned with how you're taking in the singular image you're encountering. Bordwell has a great post on this:

Which, in the spirit of this post about Beaver's awesomeness, it should be noted that the man himself responded to with an unexpected and much welcomed generosity. (Says the aforementioned "this guy.")