Playing upon the conventions, the first three shots in this scene clearly establish the time and activity in which the scene is taking place. Three Extreme Close-Ups (the gas stove alight, the sausages in the pan, and coffee being poured) make it extremely clear that it is breakfast time, no-one needs to announce it, and you do not need a wider sense of place to understand that. It is exciting to see that you don’t need a wider perspective, that you can simply show details, without needing characters and dialogue to fill what is going on. It’s almost reserved, it’s patient – the audience can take a moment to understand where the scene is without needing to establish why the characters are there.

The next shot, a slow track in on the mother figure in the kitchen then establishes her role as the housewife. Indicative of their relationship the son and mother are never shown in the same shot. He looks up at her, and he is left low, in the bottom of the frame, at the back of the frame. We are not offered much in the way of shots to link the dining table to the kitchen, in the same way we are not able to see a strong link between the mother and son. Contrasting this, and changing the dynamic again, the father character moves through the shot, head out of frame (which may express power, but also makes him seem disconnected and takes away from his humanity). The father and son occupy small amounts of space in the long shot of them eating at the table. Situated quite far from the camera they seem distant to the camera and to one another. They are divided by the table, and they are separated from each other yet they exist in the same frame (unlike the mother and son).

The mother quickly turns away any chance of affection from the father in the closeup of the two of them at the sink. There are few closeups in this scene. None of them manage to communicate positive relationships. The mother, positioned frequently on her own is not set-up to be liked, and when she is shown in the closeup with the father she pushes him away. Every other shot contains that aspect of distance between the camera and the characters.

It is interesting to note that as the audience we are very much positioned as the 4th wall – we never see that back wall and the scene unfolds directly (literally) in front of us. The choice of camera placement does not cross the line and the limited placements leave the audience as an observer of the scene – not a direct engaged. It feels static, and stale – the environment and the relationships between the characters.

This scene does not cut quickly. I really like the way Paul Thomas Anderson doesn’t rush the action or the camera movement. Despite their being tension and anger in the relationships the camera movement and coverage offers some element of calm, and this contrast is both poignant and enjoyable to watch.