Retreat
Horror/Psycho-thriller
Monster in the House
GaborPenpusher
An estranged couple decides for a last-chance counseling retreat in a forest just to meet a therapist who reveals their secrets that should rather have remained buried
Share
Have an account? Sign In Now
“After an alienated couple on hiking therapy gets captured by a horrific villain and his killer dog, they must get on tems with each other in order to escape.”
Find a beter word for:
(1) “get on terms” = slick team
(2) _”?n order to” = must?
(3) forced to = must ?
“After an alienated couple on a hiking trip gets captured by a horrific villain and his killer dog, they must build a slick team and escape.”
Using ‘forced” makes the antag active instead of the protags. This although tells us they have to work hard.
Whom or what is the couple alienated from? Do most people know what a hiking therapy is? Is it some kind of new-hippy headspace thing? How is the villain horrific? Evil looking doesn’t describe the dog very well. He could be an evil-looking sweetheart. And the whole ‘facing each other’s feelings’ thing sounds a bit lame to me. You might have a great story, but I’m not seeing it here. Please have another shot at it.
Rutger, Lee, thank you very much for the quick and great comments! I tried to rephrase according to the suggestions/quesitons:
– Alienated was chancged to estranged, not sure if this is a better reflection of a relationship gone cold after a couple of years?
– Hiking therapy: not sure how to formulate this better: the couple decides for a hiking trip, where they could hopefully discuss their problems in a new setting outside the big city they live in.
– Horrific villain changed to masked psychopath.
– Evil looking dog changed to killer dog.
– Facing each other’s feelings changed to confront each other to survive.
Remained with two sentences, somehow I like it better this way now with all the other changes.
I found your comments very helpful, please let me know how you like the updated version!
Seems to me like the unhappy couple need to cooperate with each other, not confront each other.
And why doesn’t the psycho kill them on the spot? There goes the 2nd act and the rest of the movie, yes, but there’s got to be a reason why the psycho (conveniently for the sake of script) only takes them hostage. What is it?
I think that what Lee means is tell us in a few words “why” the couple is alienated/estranged ? Don’t ask me how to do this in one or two words?
After an alienated couple on a therapeutic hiking trip gets captured by a( retired) ‘Doctor Death* ‘ and his killer dog, they must firs confront each other before they can succesfully outsmart their nemisis and survive..?
* http://www.nydailynews.com/news/justice-story/dr-death-britain-prolific-serial-killer-article-1.1423566
“An alienated couple must first confront each other in order to successfully confront the psychopath. Yes, here I feel the irony of an almost impossible task. ” Second try:
Killer Therapy
After an alienated couple on a therapeutic hiking trip gets captured by a retired psychopathic shrink and his bloodthirsty psychotic dog, they must firs confront each other before they can succesfully outsmart their nemisis and survive..?
Hey, maybe they convince the dog to attack his boss.
Also giving us a mini-step outline (like DGP did for me), makes things clearer – fiil in Act one, Act 2a, Midpoint, Twist, Act 3 leads to Resulution – and leads to the best logline.
You can also do an X meets X to get a clearer picture in your head.
* http://www.nydailynews.com/news/justice-story/dr-death-britain-prolific-serial-killer-article-1.1423566
My take:
… All his victims first undergo therapy DPG, after he think they are cured he kills them. His victims must try to convince him they still need therapy while they try to figure out an escape plan. But every wrong answer will cost them a body part they themselves may choose.
Estranged couple decides for a hiking therapy where a masked psychopath with a killer dog captures them. –(As written it sounds like being captured by a masked psychopath was part of the therapy)
with a killer dog (I don’t think you need the dog in the logline)
They are now forced to confront each other to survive. (I agree with DPG they are captured by a psychopath and they confront each other?)
—–
“After a bickering couple on a therapeutic hike are captured by psychopath, they must work together if they are to outwit their captor and escape.”
—–
Hope that helped, good luck with this!
OK, he still has a killer dog but you don’t have to put that in the logline. And to answer DPG his question “..but there?s got to be a reason why the psycho (conveniently for the sake of script) only takes them hostage. What is it?” I’m going to ad “retired psychopath shrink” to Richievs take on your logline:
After a bickering couple on a therapeutic hike are captured by a retired psychopath shrink, they must work together if they are to outwit their captor and escape.?
Much improved, Richiev.
Suggested tweak:
“When a bickering couple on a therapeutic hike at a couples retreat are pursued by a psychopath, they must learn to work together to outwit him and escape death.” (29 words)
Make it a chase. Maybe they eventually get captured — a big reversal — but at least there’s more physical action. The audience is not just looking at stationary talking heads; they are fleeing as they argue.
Also the highest stakes aren’t freedom or captivity; the highest stakes are life or death. The logline should indicate the highest stakes.
Solid re-write, I like it.
Good re-write Rutger: One change.
You wrote: retired psychopath shrink (A retired shrink who used to treat psychopaths)
Suggestion: psychopathic retired shrink. (A psychopath who was once a shrink)
Hello everyone! Thanks for your great and very valuable comments!
I am very excited to see that you seemed to be hooked to the story by the logline! A producer’s dream! 🙂
But you are way too optimistic about the story’s resolution! 😀 I will now think about all the advice and try to reformulate! Looking forward to your further comments!
I’ve decided for some bigger changes:
– The story has a surprise turn at the end. Therefore I checked the loglines of movies like Se7en, Antichrist, The Sixth Sense. All of these loglines reveal the general storyline, but they won’t give away their big surprise.
– On the “psycho” (very well shortened by dpg) I decided to remove it straight away. Loglines that usually focus around the psycho (e.g. for movies Scream, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Friday the 13th, Se7en, The Silence of the Lambs, Saw, The Blair Witch Project, The Omen, The Ring) are pushing the killer or the killings in the frontline of the story, I would say they are murder-heavy. On the other hand, the loglines of movies like Antichrist, Shine, Rosemary’s Baby, Psycho put more emphasis on circumstances and/or hints leading to the cruel events and psycho characters. Of course I will keep the masked man with his killer dog in the story!
– Hiking is also removed, what remains is the counseling retreat in the forest. Of course the hiking will remain in the story, I just felt it is not necessary in the logline.
So basically I tried to distinguish the logline from the synopsis. I feel that the logline does not have to give you all elements of the story, that is rather the task of the synopsis.
Let me know your thoughts! (And I hope you are not shocked by the big change!)
Thanks Richiev, I’m learning English step by step!
Title: Retreat – as ‘slowly escape from’ – and – “a couples retreat” hey, THATS IRONY!
I have to let this new info sink in, all I know is: keep the dog and get rid of the mask, we’ve seen it all before and you don’t need it!!! Hanibal Lecter with a mask would (a) be less scary; (b) would completely loose character.
Also…
“So basically I tried to distinguish the logline from the synopsis. I feel that the logline does not have to give you all elements of the story, that is rather the task of the synopsis.”
Only — don’t give away the end of the story (if not absolutely necessary).
What I learned from books about screenwriting – Save the Cat and internet sites/forums simplyscripts.com, logline.it – is that if you’re with a group of friends wondering what movie to go to on a Friday night, you can only convince them they must pick the movie ‘you’ like by paint a picture IN ONE SHORT SENTENCE (logline). Especially these days, when the youth attention span is less than 10 seconds.
Alas, for me, now it’s too general. What’s their ‘worst nightmares’? And what is their specific goal? Have they gone to their retreat to smooth over some rough spots in their marriage? Or as the last resort, to save their marriage? Big difference.
And who or what plays the role of the antagonist/nemesis?
What makes this couples retreat different from all the other couples retreats in business?
Thanks guys, this is really exciting! Small update:
dpg – added last chance, instead intensive. I like your questions, but I am not sure if I should give away all that information in the logline. I envision a movie that pulls in the audience (or a potential studio) becuase of these questions (audience to watch the movie, producer to read the synopsis). Not sure if you can agree with this view?
Rutger, by don’t give away the end of the story you mean I shouldn’t use “turns into their worst nightmares”?
Gabor:
It is my m.o. to ask for details that I know wouldn’t and shouldn’t be part of a logline in order to get a better understanding of the concept, to, hopefully, provide useful feedback.
And I still don’t have a clear, focused view of your concept. Your logline currently reads:
An estranged couple decides for a last-chance counseling retreat in a forest just to experience a therapy that turns into their worst nightmares.
Does that mean the couple are intentionally seeking a therapy that will force them to confront their worst nightmares? Or do they discover that the therapy forces them to confront their worst nightmares — an unintended consequence?
And, again, what is their worst nightmares?
Maybe it shouldn’t be included in the logline, but isn’t EVERY plot (certainly in the horror genre) about a protagonist who MUST confront his worst nightmare, the one thing he fears most? Isn’t that sui generis, the standard psychological dynamic of the modern dramatic formula?
So what differentiates this couple’s nightmares from the 1,001 nightmares faced down by estranged couples in a 1,0001 stories about relationships on the rocks? What makes this story unique from the others?
Hi dpg, got your points!
the couple decides for a “normal” counseling retreat service, e.g. http://guidedoc.com/the-8-best-marriage-counseling-retreats-in-the-us . They agree to meet with the service provider at a nice excursion place inside the forest, so they decide to hike there.
Their only expectation is to give their relationship a last chance by attending services like the ones in the link above. With an “I don’t think this would help, but let’s give a last try” attitude.
Meeting the psycho and its dog is absolutely unintended! He is definitely not part of the service they signed up for. They rather fall in his trap. In their captivity this guy is doing things to them they don’t like, so this is one side of what I mean by facing their nightmares. On the other hand, they will have to be honest towards each other at last, which is another kind of nightmare that an alienated couple will have to go through…
I don’t like ‘alienated’ or ‘estranged’. I don’t know what you mean by alienated in this context, and they’re not really estranged if they’re attending a counselling retreat together to save their relationship. How about a warring couple?
Hi Lee, thanks for the comment!
I think we are looking for a word that expresses the state when you are not yet breaking up, but not in heat anymore as well. A state where the partners are not putting much effort anymore into their relationship, probably they are already looking outside, but still not at the brink of breaking up. Say they were in love for 3 years with great emotions, ture love and for the last 8-12 months it has changed.
Maybe they don’t dare to break up. They don’t know yet, maybe they just don’t admit for a reason, but an outside spectator would realise that they should break up. However they are not warring, they are not yelling at each other, they have gone maybe a bit apathic even.
Hope I could describe it better with these details!
As far as I’m concerned, “a therapy that turns into their worst nightmares” is not a way to rise interst without spoiling the end. You can use this kind of sentence in a teaser not in a logline. The ending that you shoud not spoil is ‘will the pycho kill everyone, or the couple will survive’, etc. But you have to give one specific detail about the kind of “nightmares” they face in the movie: this is what the movie is about and we want to know it.
By the way, Hannibal lecter has a mask 🙂 http://oaprendizverde.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Hannibal-Lecter-Raio-X-do-Canibal-636×395.jpg
There’s nothing wrong about the mask, but it must be something original with a symbolic power.
It seems to me that your movie falls in the survival horror genre (see ‘monster in the house’ in ‘save the cat’ book). There are so so many movie in this genre but there’s always a possibility to come up with something new. I think it’s necessary to put a “new” and strong element in the logline.
Hi FFF and thanks for your thoughts! At this point I am out of ideas on the nightmare part of the logline, I would welcome any suggestions for a situation where a couple faces sins they committed against each other, against their relationship.
The first logline featured the Masked Psycho and his aggressive killer Dog, but as you can read above, it was removed.
I looked up the Monster in the House concept, and you are right, my story falls in this (sub)genre. I also checked Blake Snyder who wrote very popular books, but I was disappointed about his IMDB filmography. He is not the first one whom I see as a good teacher with very few results. Maybe I’m wrong.
Updated the nightmare part to something new. Let’s hear your voice! 🙂
Here are the earlier versions sorted by date modified latest to first:
? An estranged couple decides for a last-chance counseling retreat in a forest just to experience a therapy that turns into their worst nightmares
? An estranged couple decides for a counseling retreat in the woods just to meet the therapist of their nightmares
? Estranged couple decides for a hiking therapy where a masked psychopath with a killer dog captures them. They are now forced to confront each other to survive.
? A hiking trip of an alienated couple turns into a fast-lane relationship therapy through a sadistic encounter with a horrific villain
Your story fits Blake Snyder’s genre called Monster In The House (MITH).
The three ingredients: 1) A Monster: a terrifying supernatural being with evil at it’s core; 2) A House: small enclosed space, making escape impossible; 3)A Sin: someone is responsible for letting the monster into the house.
You have two: a house(Forrest) and a Monster (psycho therapist). What is missing is the sin.
With a little tweaking you could have a FATAL ATTRACTION like story.
My recommendation is make one of the couple the MC who either wants the divorce or wants to stick it out. And have the partner want the opposite. Link the sin to a marital discretion, (lying, cheating, etc,) for example, and connect one of the partners to the killer — like ex boyfriend, or partner in crime, etc.. Then the main action affects both the outer story (escape from the killer) and the inner story (atone for your sins).
I found the idea that a therapy is involved very interesting but…
I’m still confused, is there a psycho or not? Even if at the very end we learn that it’s just an hallucination (we’ve seen this before many times, and very well executed a few times), it’s not what is important now, you don’t need to spoil this kind of ending, but the logline should let us know what the movie is about. A man and a woman who fight? They fight together against a psycho? Against a mad therapist? Against many supernatural being who haunt the forest? Is the therapist a deus ex machina who set a trap for the couple so that they will be pushed to fight each other?
One more thing, usually there is only one real hero, not two. Even when there is a team, only one person is the real hero. Your movie seems tricky because you have two heroes. Even if they fight each other, the audience needs to take one side.
There is one more tricky point: you should make clear also if the couple is ‘broken’ and their experience in the forest ‘heal’ them the hard way, or if it’s two lovebirds who become rabid dogs. Usually, the best is to imagine the story that allows the longest journey… if you have a broken couple and they become rabid dogs the journey is shorter…
About Blake Snyder, let me know if I’m wrong but he’s the teacher who is the most successful as screenwriter. All the other gurus hardly wrote one single feature lenght movie… Anyway I don’t think that it’s really necessary to be a screenwriter to teach screenwriting. Maybe Snyder is not the best, but not because he has a short file on Imdb (with this criterion he would be the best!).
Yess FFF, but not all the time. I agree with “a symbolic power”.
OK I now for a fact that Frugals recommendation works, I read a script of a friend of mine, Robert Arthur Jansen, that was set up like this: ” Link the sin to a marital discretion, (lying, cheating, etc,) for example, and connect one of the partners to the killer ? like ex boyfriend, or partner in crime, etc.. Then the main action affects both the outer story (escape from the killer) and the inner story (atone for your sins).”
The SIN ? hmmmm – An alienated couple and one (the protag) has an extremely high life Insurance. The other one leads all of his wife?s/flings into the Woods where his partner in crime kills them. Sorry Robert, it’s the same thing but only different!
The (incomplete?) logline I like best:
An estranged couple decides for a counseling retreat in the woods just to meet the therapist of their nightmares.
Thanks Rutger!
FFF – how about you, would you suggest one of the loglines from above or an alternate version for them?
If I have to pick one : Estranged couple decides for a hiking therapy where a masked psychopath with a killer dog captures them. They are now forced to confront each other to survive.
This logline kills it!!!
An estranged couple decides for a last-chance counseling retreat in a forest just to meet a therapist who reveals their secrets that should rather have remained buried
—–
This re-write gets away from what makes you story interesting. You have a bickering couple going to therapy in the woods, they are attacked by a madman and in order survive they have to do the last thing they really want to do; work together.
The irony of your story is, being chased by the madman does what the therapy couldn’t, it gets to work together.
This logline version gets away from that.
But that goes back to the original problem, they shouldn’t be confronting each other, they should be working together to survive. They are estranged and they disagree on everything. They have to learn throughout the ordeal how to work together.