When a TV program is set to launch an expose on a commune, a member who sought refuge in the group because his grandfather’s murder was instigated by the media, devices a plan to sabotage the TV network and protect his identity.
Roberto AltoLogliner
When a TV program is set to launch an expose on a commune, a member who sought refuge in the group because his grandfather’s murder was instigated by the media, devices a plan to sabotage the TV network and protect his identity.
Share
As Foxtrot25 said.
As far as I can understand the story, the protagonist’s action line seems rather weak. ?Job #1 for a protagonist is to be proactive. ? But in this scenario, as far as I can tell, he’s more reactive than proactive. Others drive him and the story when he should be in the driver’s seat, driving the story himself.
And ?”sabotage” only amounts to him trying to talk the leadership out of letting the TV crew on the ground? ?That’s weak tea for an action line.
fwiw
Roberto,
I strongly suggest that you un-complicate this logline by starting over and focusing on what your story could really be about. Think of a logline as an elevator pitch that was taken apart by a scalpel.
He joins an off-grid media-free commune to hide out. The back story is complicated and I don’t think it belongs in the log line. It involves an accusation by the press that his grandfather was gay, which led to the grandfather being killed by gay-bashers. The setting is the portrayal of small town TV stations crucifying people and deeply influencing the narrative. In the early media stories, they even accuse him, the grandson, as being guilty. He flees his small-town and hides out, and he obviously sees the “media” as being his enemy. This type of media crucifixion occurred in ?the movie A Cry in the Dark (The dingo took my baby) when the Murchison’s were accused of killing their kid. So, that’s the backstory. He likes the commune because no one asks personal questions and he can hide out. The twist is when the commune leadership agrees to have a TV crew do an expose on them. By sabotaging, he mainly spends time trying to convince the leadership not to let them into the commune, to the private areas. He ends up losing and is forced to engage the media – and he ultimately faces his family situation, publicly. I’ve had a hard time condensing this into a log line ?as you can see.
Wouldn’t sabotaging the network backfire, only generate more publicity as all the the news media, print and electronic, focus on the incident and the commune?
And what reprehensible deed has the network committed to justify the sabotage in the eyes of the audience, especially if the commune is ripe with scandal that needs to be exposed? ? Again, why would the audience be on his side? ?It may be inconvenient to him but I don’t see how the network is to blame for wanting to do an expose on the commune that coincidentally puts him back in the spotlight. ?IOW: ?I don’t see how his behavior is morally justified because he seems to be a collateral victim, not the intentional victim of the expose.
And aren’t there are a zillion other places for the protagonist to hide out from the media?
Thank you. The protagonist didn’t commit the murder, the media’s involvement led to someone else killing his grandfather, spurned on by the media. Maybe this confuses everything. I guess that’s your point. Perhaps I t should read:
When a TV network is okayed to launch an expos? of a commune, a new member who is running from the media and actually sought refuge in the group decides to sabotage the network’s expos? hoping to keep the media out of his life forever.
>>>because his grandfather?s murder was instigated by the media
This is confusing. ?Who committed the murder (for whatever reason)? ? The protagonist who took refuge in the commune — or someone else? ?If the protagonist committed the murder, then the logline needs to say so directly, explicitly.
And if he committed the murder, why should an audience sympathize with his plight? ?Why would they want him to succeed?