When his mentor, a terrorist in disguise set’s him up with a bomb in a train terror attack, a Norwegian dropout, must evacuate the potential victims which will be killed in his name before the bomb kills them all.
BennethLogliner
When his mentor, a terrorist in disguise set’s him up with a bomb in a train terror attack, a Norwegian dropout, must evacuate the potential victims which will be killed in his name before the bomb kills them all.
Share
Not sure there is enough dramatic fuel in the tank. Just find better adjectives and trim some stuff. ?If you drop the nationality it gives it more pace, plus it doesn’t change the story. ? Plus is there more for him to do. ?Is there two hours of story evacuating people. ?What is getting in his way?
A student must evacuate an entire train after discovering his meant has hidden a bomb in his luggage.
Now add favour and detail builds story.
A student must evacuate an entire train after learning he has been framed for a future terrorist by his mentor that has hidden a bomb in his luggage.
i hope this helps.
As CraigDGriffiths said.
And then there’s the time lapse factor.? A train can be stopped and evacuated in minutes.? So what happens to flesh out the story rest of ?90 or so minutes of screen time?? I just don’t see enough dramatic meat on the bones of the central concept–evacuating the train –?as presented in the logline.? The meat of the story, so far as I can tell, is the manipulation and deceit leading up to the planting of the bomb.
What is the story really about?? How an impressionable, love-besotted young man is manipulated and deceived?? Or how he must save himself — and others–?after he is duped and used?
Perhaps re consider the concept by leaving the mentor on the train as an accomplice and placing the MC’s change of heart in the middle of act two. This way you give the MC an antagonist (driven by ideology), a literal ticking time bomb and a goal.
Other wise, as mentioned in the above comments, the scope for plot development is limited. Him changing his mind (i.e learning his lesson and achieving his inner goal) should come about later in the story. What if him and his mentor intended to kill a bunch of politicians on the train, but a group of school kids get on and the mentor wants to kill them all. Now the MC realises that killing innocent people for ideology is wrong and turns on the mentor.
Mentor for what?? Political terrorism? Religious indoctrination?? That needs to be clarified.
And my previous reservations stand.
And how can the young man be accused of terrorism? before the terrorist act has happened?
Okay assuming that somehow he agreed to carry out a terror attack but then changed his mind, he still sounds like a foolish person not a naive one. There are some things that can pass for naivety but a terror attack is certainly not one, what did he think was going to happen?!!!
The reason for him to change his mind is unclear, this needs to be elaborated on as it tells the audience that he has learned his lesson and is a better person for it. Secondly, if he was part of the plan all along then the event that convinces him to do the right thing and not kill people sounds like the inciting incident and therefore should come at the end of act one. Albeit early in the plot for him to overcome his flaw, I believe that in this particular case it can still work, and may benefit the story.
This is some adjustments in my plot and logline.:
“To please his Muslim girlfriend, a valiant dropout converts to Islam, gets set up by his religious mentor in a train bomb attack, he must evacuate his frantic countrymen before the bomb kills them.”