A veteran goes to war against a crew of corrupt cops intent on controlling the US / Mexico border.

Jean-Marie’s comments are quite apt. dpg’s comments are reasonable. And his point about lack of stakes is particularly important. My own analysis Is:

Firstly, shades of “First Blood” #1 here. But, even leaving that aside, there is the problem of why should the reader care about the veteran’s struggle.

On the plus side, the protagonist and the corrupt cops make good adversaries. One can clearly see a feature-worth of combat/action potential between them.

The problem is – again – why should the reader care about the protagonist? His motivation is too vague. To be fair, the reader can guess that the veteran seems to have some generic sense of justice or duty. Which is nice, but lacks a strong ‘pull’ to empathy on its own. A more personal/human extra motive is needed here. Even if it is as simple as defending a woman being harrassed by the cops. (A single mother would be a good candidate for as such a woman.)

An extra motivation that would strongly work is one that ties in with the veteran’s prior war/battle experience. For example, perhaps he feels the need to somehow honour or repay the comradeship of his squad-mates that never made it out. Some kind of survivor-guilt issue could also work, though that’s been done a few times already.

In summary, the vital missing element in this logline is the extra personal reason that is motivating the veteran’s fight for justice. That extra element may well be in the script. But its absence in the logline makes the story concept come across as hollow to the reader.

Steven Fernandez (Judge)