Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
A Scientist and Psychologist Couple manipulate the 2 Year Biosphere Living Experiment by selecting 4 lesbian Women and 4 heterosexual men. As the men go sex-crazy the Scientist allows them out for an evening, which ruins her psychological experiment and the couple, now accidentally locked inside, are at war with each other also. (Improved one from comments on this site. I hope to make this a comedy.)
At what point in the story do the couple become locked inside? (Beginning of second act?) What is the objective or goal once they are trapped inside? Is it just to survive for 2 years? What is stopping them from doing that? (Presumably the biosphere is set up to handle 8 inhabitants? So I imagine thRead more
At what point in the story do the couple become locked inside? (Beginning of second act?)
What is the objective or goal once they are trapped inside? Is it just to survive for 2 years? What is stopping them from doing that? (Presumably the biosphere is set up to handle 8 inhabitants? So I imagine there’d be plenty of supplies for 2 people trapped in there. Also, if they’re not actively trying to kill one another, and there’s no other antagonist, I’d say survival is pretty much assured. So what you have is 2 characters trapped in one location who dislike one another, but with no other objectives. So they’re just squabbling for the 90 min run time? I can’t imagine anyone would want to fund that film, much less see it).
I think there’s potential in the idea — the setup works for a low-budget kind of thing. But I agree with Nir; I think the premise needs work.
“After they’re sealed inside?their?biosphere experiment midway through a supply delivery, two?unscrupulous academics in a failing marriage must work together to survive the next 24 months.”
Trying that out, it makes me wonder; what is at stake if the experiment fails? That seems to provide the momentum for WHY they must tough it out, instead of just shut it down and escape.
Also — it feels like the repair of their relationship; and arc from distant to loving for the couple, is going to be central to the story. But I want to know, in the logline, what it is that might drive a wedge between them? Perhaps there are THREE people locked in there? (And this person can be used as the third point in a love triangle — perhaps, the third character is so spurned by the way they’re manipulated and used by the other two trying to get back at each other, that in the second half even becomes the antagonist; attempting to sabotage the experiment and kill them all before the end).
It feels more than a little “Bio-Dome”, but could have some of “The Martian” in there.
See lessA former high school jock is thrust into duty to save his high school reunion after a prank turns his classmates into the living dead.
Well ... the rescue of the ex-girlfriend seems pretty central to the idea? "After a viral outbreak turns the attendees of a 10 year reunion into ravenous zombies, a down-on-his-luck ex-jock turned shoe-salesman battles?the living dead to rescue?a group of survivors (and his high-school sweetheart) tRead more
Well … the rescue of the ex-girlfriend seems pretty central to the idea?
“After a viral outbreak turns the attendees of a 10 year reunion into ravenous zombies, a down-on-his-luck ex-jock turned shoe-salesman battles?the living dead to rescue?a group of survivors (and his high-school sweetheart) trapped in?the gym.”
Maybe a LITTLE wordy, but I think clearer and provides more of the hook — or at least hints at the themes of redemption and reclaiming former glory?
Substitute ‘viral outbreak’ for ‘chemical explosion’ or ‘miscast spell’, whatever happens. I think ‘prank’ calls for specificity, and weighs down the logline in the wrong place (because the reader is curious about the nature of the prank). I’d suggest keeping that bit a little vaguer (leave it for the script – just describe the outcome of the prank) and get the logline to the meat and potatoes of the story quicker.
With a little more information, I’m more interested in the story, for sure, and can see?the script’s potential. (Who are the survivors? Did they not drink the tainted punch that turned everyone into zombies because they’re the members of his AA group, or worse … the nerds he used to pick on? Maybe he busted his knee and couldn’t play?basketball anymore – a cliche, I know – but dragging the ex-jock to the part of the school that resulted in the current trajectory of his life is a great way to build ‘the cave’ in the second act).
As for ‘who would want to play this part’ – in a story of arrested development and the quest for former glory, I can see tons of actors who’d go for that. My first thought was Chris Pratt (but fat Chris Pratt from Parks & Rec).
Anyway … good luck with the logline and/or script.
See lessWhen a meltdown started accidentally by a butter sandwich opens a time vortex in a lonely computer geek?s house, he and two previous inhabitants thrown in the present by the vortex, must save the planet from an alien warrior race who thinks humans are unfit to handle time travel.
I mean, even if the butter sandwich is the best idea since sliced bread, it is still 1 scene in your movie, one gag. What's the rest of the story gonna rely on to run?
I mean, even if the butter sandwich is the best idea since sliced bread, it is still 1 scene in your movie, one gag. What’s the rest of the story gonna rely on to run?
See less