“The relations between two radically different filmmakers takes a u-turn upon discovering one’s been the secret critic to the other’s ongoing masterpiece-MOST PERSONAL TO HIM”
description:
I plan to title the film, same as the masterpiece in question, for which they have upside-down film philosophies, which thus leads to a tense relationship
(maybe gradually his own editor takes side with the critic in a subtle way)
but then he just makes it regardless
and begins to agree too
..both end up learning so much from each other, they just sip their coffee in silence and we know life goes on
(There should be a strong reason why he is adamant to make the self destructive film, which eventually sinks.
What makes it so personal)
I concur with Nir Shelter on the issue of significant stakes that would emotionally invest an audience in the outcome.
Also:
>>>this is a Hollywood insider story and most producers hate/avoid reading these kinds of scripts.
Particularly from outsiders.? It takes an insider to know what it’s like to be an insider.
The concept lacks dramatic stakes. What’s the worst that would happen should he make the film and stay true to his vision? At the same time, what’s the worst that would happen should he not? I simply can’t see a friendship as a worthy enough stake, certainly not in today’s saturated market full of high-end dramas and action-packed adventures. More so, this is a Hollywood insider story and most producers hate/avoid reading these kinds of scripts.
The Coen Brothers could get away with it, maybe…
>>>would be him making his film regardless
Then something like that (more clearly defined) should be in the logline.
However,
>>>discovering the painful truth, that he lived a life full of lies..
should not be in the logline. Because : 1] It’s a spoiler, giving away a critical beat of how the story ends. 2] Loglines are about what a protagonist intentionally sets out to do, not what he unintentionally discovers.? And 3] the come-to-realize/discovery pertains to a subjective issue. Although subjective issues are entailed in the pursuit of an objective goal, loglines focus on? objective issues, not subjective ones.
fwiw
just like “hayao miyazaki” this is his final film
he cannot afford to regret he never made what he really wanted to
All his life he made films for the audience but now when he tries to make one for his inner peace, he is in direct conflict with his only kindred spirit (trying to sabotage his project critiquing painful true details)
when he discovers this, he chooses his film over his friend (excruciatingly painful for him which he suffers throughout this journey)
Therefore “a course dramatic action that results from the rupture” would be him making his film regardless and discovering the painful truth, that he lived a life full of lies..
so they sip coffee as the sun sets,
an event proof that there is no bigger truth than a kindred spirit, not even your masterpiece..
The logline sets up a situation with lots of possibilities for conflict.? However, declaring a rupture in the relationship is not enough to round out a logline.? A logline needs to state a course dramatic action that results from the rupture.
What becomes the protagonist’s objective goal — his act of revenge or spite (I presume)?
And is there a sole protagonist or is this the story of “dueling” dual protagonists?