Update of RHSC
OlDustyDoggLogliner
‘Off The Grid’ After moving off the grid, bickering newlyweds accidentally kill the creepy neighbors kid and now must work together to escape the families vengeful wrath.
Share
Have an account? Sign In Now
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Hi Dusty.
A very quick take on it…
When newlyweds accidentally kill the creepy neighbours son, they must fight to stay alive, as the family begins a campaign of revenge.
I wasn’t sure how necessary “bickering” and “must work together” is to the logline. Perhaps for the script. I mean – all newlyweds bicker, it’s not a big enough thing to put in there. “must work together” goes without saying. It seems like excess stuff for the reader to carry.
I dunno – I thought “son” was more primal and personal and specific than “kid”.
I considered putting? “relentless” in front of campaign. Sounds pretty intense as it is.
Admittedly – there’s something wrong with this logline. I can’t put my finger on it. You could perhaps get rid of “creepy”?
The fact this family is getting revenge says more about than an adjective could.
Perhaps get rid of “begins”? and just do “campaigns to get revenge”.
?
Living off the grid seems to be an incidental not a causal nor a complicating factor of the plot; hence it is extraneous for the purpose of a logline or movie title.
thedarkhorse:
Yes, I have read Aristotle’s Poetics.? (Several translations to get a full range of the meaning of his words).? It’s a timeless classic, a must-read for anyone who wants to become a screenwriter or dramatist. The book deeply informs my m.o. for reviewing loglines, particularly his points about the unity of plot and the necessity of plausible causality between the inciting incident and action.
[My other pre-20th/21st century text on drama is Hegel’s theory of tragedy, the most original contribution to dramatic theory since Ari.? And, alas, underappreciated.]
After their car crash kills the neighbors son, newlyweds fight for survival against the fathers lust for vengeance by befriending the red-headed step child.
There are too many non-causal events and unclear relationships. How did “their” car crash kill the “neighbor’s son”? Who is the “red-headed step son” and how will befriending him calm the “father’s lust for vengeance”?
More importantly though, why should we root for the newlyweds? Do they possess any redeeming qualities to make us prefer that they prevail over their neighbor? As it stands, the audience might prefer to see the grieving father extract his revenge (especially if he could not get the justice he sought from the the state).
Aristotle is the starting point – branch your tree of knowledge out from there. Each book and article you read will likely bring up interesting perspectives on the same points made by others. Ultimately, if you walk away with one or two pearls from each read, you’re doing well. As it’s all about finding the nuggets of knowledge that work best for you, keep mining the vast landscape of writing about writing, and you’ll find your gems.
Mammet is great, his writing and his masterclasses are all worthwhile. A few others to consider; Karel Segers’ blog The Story Department, Christopher Vogler, Linda Seger (not related), Film Courage Youtube channel, and obviously Robert McKee.
As for the logline, it seems that the story is there: the main characters cause an accident, kill a boy and now have to fend for their lives – fine. The problem is that it sounds rather generic, if not a bit flat. Perhaps if the setting was unique or the way in which the father tries to kill them was original it would help elevate the premise.