An ensemble crime story set in Detroit about an ex-con who goes back for one last heist in order to settle his family?s debt.

As Karel would say, ensemble stories are tricky beasts that are best left till when you are quite expert in your screenwriting craft. But, even leaving that aside, this concept lacks any great appeal as it is stated.

Most importantly, the idea of an ex-con coming back into crime – even if “for one last time” – smacks of compulsion or giving into old bad habits, rather than, say, someone making a character-challenging sacrifice for some noble reason. (I actually think a better set up is for the ex-con to make efforts to prevent a son or cousin from falling into criminal life, with the motif of atonement that that could entail.)

While the logline hints at a possibly noble motivation (clearing family debt), it fails to tease much sympathy from the reader for the ex-con. Put it this way: There are many reasons why his family could be in debt, and not all of those reasons would create empathy for the character. It makes a big difference, for example, if the debt has arisen due to beer, gambling and smoking versus the family’s attempt to give a chronically ill daughter or neice an experimental medical treatment. By leaving the cause of the debt indeterminate, the reader is left ambivalent and also left making his or her own guesses about the quality of the ex-con’s motivation. (Not a smart move: A logline should close off the opportunities for a reader to make a negative guess about what is not made clear.)

So, at a minimum, we need to be told a little more (somehow) of why the ex-con is worthy of our empathy and why this heist is not just going to be just another ‘job’ for him – like all the others he has done in the past. (For example, is he starting to suffer Parkinson’s disease? If so, suddenly it’s clear that this whole enterprise is significantly riskier for him.)

Steven Fernandez (Judge)