A desperate CEO’s legally ambiguous plans to save his company are undermined when he is blackmailed by a mysterious ex-employee.

In my suggested logline, I used "benevolent" to increase the logline's irony (nearly always a good thing in a logline).

When you've got a CEO using dubious means to save his corporation, it's more ironic if the corporation is benevolent ? it makes his dubious choice all the more ironic and ethics-challenging.

Of course, that may not be the story steveylang intends to tell. But it would be an interesting one.

Also, generally, in Hollywood loglines (with their wide-sale ambitions), mentioning a corporation automatically implies that it's a corporation of some worth-watching size. "Small" corporations seldom show up in Hollywood stories, unless they are comedies. Just sayin'.

Thanks all for the wonderful feedback! I am going to think it over for a couple of days to try to fill out some of these details, and incorporate them in the longline.

I wanted to comment because I really like this logline and the sense of the tension in this movie. I can see the others' comments are phenomenal. My two cents is that CEOs can range from multi-billion dollar corporations to work-from-home operations. Corporations grow, flounder, fail, hold steady, innovate, or whatever.?Usually when we think of CEOs we think of the rich and powerful, but that's not always the case. I'm not sure I would use "benevolent" to describe the company as much as I would indicate the size or scope of the company: global, Fortune 500, up-n-coming, for example because each category of corporation conjures a different sense of conflict. An old, rich, powerful CEO functions differently than a from-the-ground-up entrepreneurial hot shot. I just craved a little more detail in that sense. I would also consider naming the industry if it has any relation to the story or characters.