After his son confesses a murder to him, an obsessively upright police officer on the brink of a once in a lifetime promotion must use all his power and skills to destroy all evidence before the truth is uncovered.
JMLogliner
After his son confesses a murder to him, an obsessively upright police officer on the brink of a once in a lifetime promotion must use all his power and skills to destroy all evidence before the truth is uncovered.
Share
So the MC is corrupt – this negates the initial character description. That aside, I’m not sure how the audience will take to this, but I dare say, empathy will be a problem.
What Nir Shelter said.?His actions ?seem to contradict how his character is defined whereas his actions should flow from how his character is defined.
Now, if the story is about a man who always thought of himself and others have always thought of him as ?scrupulous in enforcing law and ?obsessive about following proper procedure and then he discovers ?the perp is his son, his beloved son — well ?that’s a different dramatic issue and the logline should be revised to make that clear.
But then why would his son dare to confess his crime to someone who has a reputation for being scrupulous? What is that about? ?Why can’t the officer discover ?that his son is the perp in the course of his investigation? ?And why can’t his promotion be contingent on his solving the crime? ?Which would intensify his dramatic predicament.
If his son has confessed I am not sure what the point would be.
As for the rest I do get why a father might go against his nature in order to save his son.
Thank you all for the feedback. As Nir and dpg said, this is a contradictory character who has to choose between the written law and the family law. But I think that my approch on the story is wrong. I really like dpg’s idea that the MC discovers his son is involved in a crime and that solving that crime is intimately linked with his promotion and his future as a police officer. That would place the character right in the middle of his choice and would also put the story in motion. As Richiev said, there is no point in his son confessing the crime as it would also sound like an ad hoc information to the script and an easy way out of the problem. Once again, thanks a lot for your feedback. It’s really helpful. Cheers.
I think it could be better if in the logline you raise the question if the father will or not commit a crime to save his son instead of just give us the answer.