When a researcher creates a technology that can see anything from the last twenty four hours, a former FBI profiler must find him before the private assassins of a corrupt politician he exposed.
JasonFPenpusher
When a researcher creates a technology that can see anything from the last twenty four hours, a former FBI profiler must find him before the private assassins of a corrupt politician he exposed.
Share
How about refocusing the plot so the scientist is the protagonist. ??1] He seems to be a more interesting character, certainly more inventive than the profiler. 2] He has more at stake. ?Like everything ?– his life. ?By comparison, What’s at stake for the profiler? ?What does he stand to gain or lose by the outcome? ?What skin does he have in the game?
If you want to retain the profiler as the protagonist, then he needs to have serious skin in the game. ?It needs to be life or death stakes for him, too. (And what particular skill does being an unemployed profiler have that helps him to find the scientist?)
fwiw
Also, if the scientist can know everything that’s happened in the preceding 24 hours, then doesn’t he have the advantage of a certain amount of foreknowledge about the movements of the assassins? ?Knowing more the movements of the assassins than they can know about his movements, and knowing more about the assassins movements than even the profiler can, ?why can’t he just take appropriate evasive, life-saving action?
Finally, ?rather than kill the scientist, why wouldn’t the corrupt politician rather kidnap the inventor and his technology so he can use it for his own corrupt ends? ?Wouldn’t having an omniscient view of world events, albeit on a time delayed basis, ?enable him to defeat all comers, all threats.
There were some movies which have multiple characters and various POV.
However, I still believe that we should establish a protagonist at whom audience
can sympathize since the very beginning.
We could and should develop story background for other roles, too, but if the weigh
of the story is distributed towards multiple characters, I think it would only confuse
tire the audience.
So, a heavier concentration on one main protagonist must still be present. If the scientist
is the main character, then the profiler shouldn’t be mentioned as another Subject. He must
be put as object.
“When a researcher creates a technology that can see anything from the last twenty four
hours, he must escape from the pursue by agents hired by a corrupt politician to kidnap him,
while he is accompanied only by a retired FBI profiler.”
Is this better? Hahahaha
JasonF:
You are correct that usually a logline should not contain spoilers.
However, after reading your comments, it still seems to me that the scientist has more skin in the game. ?The profiler only has his reputation at stake. ?The scientist has his life. ?For the purpose of dramatic suspense in a thriller movie, life always trumps reputation.
And he still seems to be the more interesting character with the greater character arc. ?Describing him as “naive” means he has a lot of growing up to do in coming to terms with the consequences of his invention — and his own talent. ?In comparison, what’s the character arc of the FBI profiler other than getting to vindicate himself, prove to everyone else he was right all along.
?(Vindication is a worthy dramatic motivation, of course — but in this story, ?I get a sense of a stronger emotional catharsis and cognitive closure in the arc of the scientist. ?The story motif of the “Sorcerer’s Apprentice” comes to mind.)
And the hook of your story is the technology — not the profiling. The ability to have an omniscient view of recent events?completely overwhelms the importance of the role of the FBI character. ?Which is not to say the FBI character cannot be a key player , but the technology is the sizzle, the strongest selling point of the concept. It’s the McGuffin, the thing everyone in the story wants.
(Minor quibble: he’s lecturing FBI trainees not “students”. And if he’s lecturing, he’s still actively employed by the FBI. He’s just been pulled from field work. )
fwiw