Breaking the 180 is not the end of the world, however, for this you have to consider multiple 180 lines. Like in the above example, (I don’t remember exactly how it was done in the show) you could do a 180 line for Walt vs Hank and a different one for Walt vs Skylar. Or a 180 for Hank and Marie vs Walt and Skylar. The 180 is not set in stone. It’s a fluid thing that is meant more for audience’s unconscious spatial cohesion. 

Keep in mind this is also a square, freestanding table. If it were a booth, options would be far more limited. 

A nice wide shot that establishes the space, and having the characters sat in a "cross" formation probably helps a lot.

In college, I had a friend who auditioned for the waiter role in this scene. He asked me to help him practice. I suggested he play it as a super outgoing guy who doesn’t realize he’s not welcome in the conversation. He disagreed because of his (real-life waiter) experience and played it as someone who was bored of his job and just going through the motions. He didn’t get the part, then a year or so later, this episode came out and the waiter does exactly what I suggested my friend do. Not saying he would’ve gotten the role if he listened to me, but it was a blatant “I told you so” moment watching that scene.

Sorry my comment is not helpful to your question. I just haven’t thought about that moment in over a decade!

As long as you establish who's sitting across from who and occasionally switch to a wide shot to keep that relation in mind, 180 doesn't really matter a ton just as long as you're mixing up the angles and not ping ponging between 180 shots.

Breaking the line is not always disorienting if you know what you’re doing. Big rule of filmmaking is know what the rules are so you can know how to break them. As long as you can understand why breaking the line can mess up your scene, you should be able to justify the breaks without disorienting your audience. What makes it work here is that we clearly establish where each character is within their X formation in a wide shot. We also have a lot of dirty singles where we see one character fully and a shoulder, side profile, strand of hair etc. of another character. This allows us to stay grounded in place while switching POVs. It also allows us to get multiple character POVs within one shot. Many of the shots favor Walt (it is his story, after all) even if we aren’t focused on him.

A lot of it comes down to the edit. You can cut in a way where you move around the table instead of jumping directly from one side to the other.

There’s a great scene like this in When Harry Met Sally, it’s the other, less famous, restaurant scene from that movie.

Let’s be clear about what the 180 degree rule is about. You do not want to cross “the line of action”. In a two person dialogue scene, the line of action is a line between the two characters. If you have four characters you have eight lines of action! But only one of them matters at a time: the line for the specific exchange happening. You’re free to break all the other lines! It’s complicated and hard, but absolutely doable.

I think it’s important for you to note that the most talented directors choose to reestablish the access/“break the line“ at the most important and pivotal moments of the scene. It will enhance the dynamics and be motivated by character. A revelation?: Re-establish the line.

Since we are moving around a table where everybody is at 90 degree angles to each other, our brains aren’t good at tracking where each character is in relation to the others, and as such we can essentially do whatever the hell we want without it feeling weird

If it was Walt/Skyler on one side of a rectangular table, and Hank/Marie on the other side, and we were breaking 180, that could end up feeling weird

Set it up That 70's Show style. Get 'em nice and toasty while you're at it

A Couple things I'm noticing on the specific scene that is linked...

For starters they're using the waiter as motivation to go to the wide shot a few times and reestablish the relationship of all the characters in the frame. They of course go to other wide shots, but the couple times the waiter comes in it breaks up the monotony of going to the wide shot. This is a bloody brilliant directing choice as it also adds some tension into the scene.

For the most part the 180 is pretty much established each time we go to an exchange between 2 characters. Actually I shouldn't say established, it's reestablished each time. It's established because the edit breaks you away from the previously established 180 through a generous use of reaction shots. It's really kind of a brilliant solution. You can't get confused because each time the 180 is reestablished, and then wiped from your brain by a reaction shot.

This is the kind of shit that I have to talk about to my non-filmmaking friends when they have no idea what directing is.

There’s a great scene in the movie the insider with Al Pacino, where he and Christopher Plummer are talking with a few lawyers over lunch. I’d say it’s about an hour into the movie. Round table, discussion, really excellent and easy to follow who is speaking and where they are at the table. I think one of the tricks they used is to always include the side or back of someone’s head from the previous shot in the subsequent shot. So you’ve always can keep track of where the camera is around the table.

Could always set up a little track and do a take orbiting around the table for an idea

One thing to consider is the emotional tone of the scene for your coverage. Always get your geography early out but everything after depends on what is happening. The breaking bad scene is very confrontational and the coverage reflects that but you might want to cover a romantic scene or a comedic scene a little differently.

My lukewarm advice is to actually shoot the scene with your director and some volunteers. Edit it and see if your coverage works. I find there is a choreography you have to get with the camera and edit when your actors are largely static.

What makes it feel weird is if you alternate their eye lines. Keep consistency with that and you won’t have to worry about crossing the line.

I think in this scene it just doesn't matter much to the audience if they're "disoriented" because we know everyone is sitting down and not going to move. There's nothing else for us to keep track of in the room, we don't need to know who can see what, or where other objects are in relation to anyone.

Each shot shows who is talking and who they're talking to, and it just doesn't matter the exact configuration of seating at the table.

Is it though? Besides the wide establishing shot all camera angles are from Cranston’s sides. And it makes sense that you start the wide looking at him, he is the star of the show

I love scenes like this, and I also love shooting them, it's like a huge puzzle to figure out, and making sure each moment is captured is a nice challenge. They take forever to shoot though. Much easier if the lighting doesn't have to change too much either.

I did one, it was 5 people around a table, and a 6th that was a prop(talking radio), I did two wides. Everyone got a front on single with neutral eyeline and set of french overs for one section between the main characters. Took a whole day, but it was a lot of fun.

Did anyone and I mean anyone, expect Walt to pin it all on Hank?

Dude I flashbacked through the entire series

I think it works because the actors are quite different in looks, voices and affects.

So it doesn’t matter the angle. Whether from behind left or right, or more face on, we know it's walter not The other guy. The women have wildly different hair

Just don't think of it so much as when you break the rule, as how and when you move the line. Once it's constructive rather than restrictive, that rule suddenly seems way more useful and easier to apply.

A scene is not a solitary atomic thing. It has phases/movements/turns within it. Find those moments in the story, and it's very easy to find good opportunities to move the line.

This will take up more time than you’ll schedule for. First time, add more time 🙏

A crafty editor can also find ways to get away with it by establishing certain characters as the "anchor" point between different lines of axes, letting the camera better get away with moving around and potentially breaking one axis to get another.

Part of what makes it less disorienting is having a dirty shot where you can tell who they are talking to.

I haven't watched this scene for a while, but based off memory and the screenshots, I'll point some things out.
- There's multiple 180° lines. Each of those should be stay consistent through each beat.
- There's multiple wide shots to orient the viewer.
- The first handful of frames all make sense comparable to the first wide frame. Walt is looking to frame left when talking to Hank and Skyler, and to frame right when talking to Marie, same as the wide shot establishes.
- The angle change from the first frame to the last frame shows the change in power dynamic. In the first frame Walt is boxed in by Hank and Marie who are larger on screen. They literally think they have him cornered. But by the final frame it's reversed - Hank is now reduced in size and even the teenage waiter towers over him, mirroring the way Walt outmaneuvers him in this scene. It's not just sight lines that matter, it's who holds the power in every frame - if you get that right, the story still makes sense.
- The biggest change comes when Marie is talking directly to Skyler - because this is a separate argument. There's the argument of Hank trying to bring down Walt, and then there's the tension between the sisters/family. Crossing the line here takes us in between the different conflicts that are happening within the same scene. But within each individual conflict/conversation it probably stays consistent.
- You can use movement within a scene to redirect the sight lines or reset the 180° line. Eg if a character turns their head from left to right - even just in a reaction shot, you can now have a whole new 180° line.

Every time I see this scene, I can't get it out of my head that Jane Kaczmarek is in the room visiting the set that day and she and Bryan Cranston were probably laughing it up between takes.

I would think some disorienting feeling would be desired here. Hank's entire world is falling apart realizing Walt is who he's been chasing.  All 4 people may not be sure what side the others are on.

There is no 180 to break. Its a suggestion not a rule.

Everyone has different coloured clothing on, we can keep track on who is who.

Shooting a 4-way dialogue scene and breaking *bad

Sex and the City had regular scenes with the main characters at their coffee shop, all four of them at a close table, the eye lines were surprisingly tricky. Worth referring to.

As for the 180 rule, it seems en vogue right now to flaunt it.

People often make too much about 180 without realizing what it's actually for.

The main purpose of the 180 degree rule is to manage camera placement and eye line around a scene with 2 people - most often a scene in which neither character changes position or moves substantially.

It works great for a 2 person interview or a scene with 2 people across from each other at a desk or table or 2 people are talking to each other at a door.

The important result of following the 180 degree rule is that each person is talking to the opposite side of the frame, which supports the idea that they are talking to each other.

If you break the 180 degree rule, now each person is talking to the same side of the frame. And your brain tells you, "This just looks wrong."

Now, once you have more than 2 characters and/or those characters start moving around, the 180 degree rule goes out the window. However, it can inform the rest of your camera placements depending on who is talking to whom.

Interestingly enough, this scene is a great example of that.