John is a 30 years old painter who after years long struggle finally makes it in life with new extraordinary painting technique, but mysteriously horrifying secrets of creating masterpieces cannot be hidden for long in a small city. Will John's secrets destroy his life forever or will he find a way out?

This logline feels a little confused to me. I like the concept; an artist who, behind the scenes, performs some grisly acts to make his successful and popular art. I also think it’s interesting if you can make John sympathetic enough, or present it as enough of a mystery, that as the methods start to come to light we question our protagonist’s innocence.

The first problem I see is the goal you present in the second half: will his secrets destroy his life or will he find a way out, doesn’t make any sense. If the story is about, say, a serial killer who makes art out of his victims, at what point at all is “finding a way out” (of the country town) a goal? Wouldn’t it be to escape the law? Also, if that’s the kind of ‘horrifying secrets’ hidden behind his work, do you think your audience will feel satisfied if the goal and stakes of the movie are just that he wants to break out of the monotony of country town life?

Your protagonist is not illustrated well enough. We just know his name is John, and that he’s a 30 year old painter. So keep painter, fine, we get an idea of what an artist is. But is there some better way to describe his character (and the internal journey he’s going to go on)? Is he reclusive, outrageous, deranged, mute? It could change the tone entirely.

Finally, I think it’s just too wordy. So, how about …

“After a high profile purchase gains him international recognition, a reclusive painter must hide the horrifying secret behind his masterpieces from the army of press that descends on his small town.”