After an attempt on his father’s life, a by-the-book Marine captain must kill his father’s rivals and become head of his own crime family to protect those he loves.

is this supposed to be the Godfather? ?My God this misses the mark. ?Where's the sense of grandeur? Where is the Shakespearean struggle between father and son, and light and darkness that plagues Micheal as he weighs ?avenging his father, falling prey to his demons, or to be a "good" man?

I think is a great exercise to write a logline for this movie, to fit into the template we've established on the site. At the same time, since we obviously are not trying to sell the script, I it benefits to take a few liberties to show the hook and uniqueness of the film in a logline we craft. That's my reason I think "who wishes to avoid mob life" should stay, even if we wouldn't normally include something like that.
I've watched quite a few overly hyped movies, and most meet my expectations. While I don't really like Batman, when I recently watched the Dark Knight I was thoroughly enjoying the movie, even if I did identify a lot of problems that a lot of people gloss over.(I hardly think it's the best comic book movie, or even the best Batman movie.) But anyway, there was just something that turned me off from the Godfather and made me not want to watch its sequel.
I thought it may be that I don't really like older movies, but when I watched Casablanca I enjoyed it, and now I plan to spend a few weeks solely watching classic movies I've never been interested in watching before. I think I'll hold out on the Godfather until I'm a bit older. Maybe I'll appreciate it more in a few years.

Michael's over arching, proactive goal once he does take charge and in the other 2 movies is to make the family business legit. (His bridge to becoming legit is to invest in Las Vegas casinos, divest his crime holdings to his ?capos.)

He wants to fully assimilate, become just another regular Mike living the American dream.

(The very first words of dialogue in the film, spoken by the undertaker, Bonasera, are not coincidental: "I believe in America". ?But there he is pleading for the Godfather to give him justice ?because his faith in America has been betrayed by the American legal system.)

Here's my thematic word for the story arc of the entire franchise: assimilation. ?Or two words: going legit.

And, of course, he can't. ?The harder he tries, the more deeply enmeshed he becomes in the "lifestyle". ?He's made a deal with devil -- and there's no way out, no absolution.

(BTW: ?How the book and movie credibly effects Michael's flip from staying out of the family business to becoming inextricably involved is well-worth studying in detail, beat for beat, scene for scene.)

Michael's over arching, proactive goal once he does take charge and in the other 2 movies is to make the family business legit. (His bridge to becoming legit is to invest in Las Vegas casinos, divest his crime holdings to his ?capos.)

He wants to fully assimilate, become just another regular Mike living the American dream.

(The very first words of dialogue in the film, spoken by the undertaker, Bonasera, are not coincidental: "I believe in America". ?But there he is pleading for the Godfather to give him justice ?because his faith in America has been betrayed by the American legal system.)

Here's my thematic word for the story arc of the entire franchise: assimilation. ?Or two words: going legit.

And, of course, he can't. ?The harder he tries, the more deeply enmeshed he becomes in the "lifestyle". ?He's made a deal with devil -- and there's no way out, no absolution.

(BTW: ?How the book and movie credibly effects Michael's flip from staying out of the family business to becoming inextricably involved is well-worth studying in detail, beat for beat, scene for scene.)

Right,

Failing the plot is fine. Failing the logline plot is a reveal we don't think we need to include.

I guess one could include that if he doesn't successfully assume control of the family business that death is the final result. And not just for the MC, but for his loved ones as well.

... to desperately?ensure his safety and the safety of his family.

I dunno.

I agree with you though, as much as I was told to like this movie, every time I try to watch it from start to finish, I fall asleep. I mean, the wedding scene is, well... a wedding.

"so then him becoming a head mobster would suggest that he has failed the story plot in a major way."

That's because he does. It's been a little while and I may not remember some of the things, but Michael?doesn't want to be a part of the mob. But by the end of the story he is. He failed in that goal. That's part of dpg's point, that the story is a tragedy because of Michael's story arc and him becoming what he didn't want to become. The problem with your suggestion is that it doesn't really describe a plot. It just states that he assumes control of the crime family. Then what? The revenge against those who attempted to kill his father is the active part of the plot.
However, I do think "who wishes to avoid mob life" could be dropped, as reluctantly taking his father's place conveys that meaning, but Michael specifically doesn't want to be a part of the mob, so I think leaving it in may better convey his character arc.

DK,

The problem with:

After an attempt on his father's life, a Marine who wishes to avoid mob life must get revenge and reluctantly take his father's place as the head of a?crime family. (31)

is that you clearly state that Michael wishes to avoid mob life, so then him becoming a head mobster would suggest that he has failed the story plot in a major way.

After an attempt on his father's life, a Marine reluctantly assumes control of the family crime business to further ensure his family's safety.

When I watched this film, I was...disappointed. I watched it earlier this year, or late last year, and I had hyped it up in my mind to be something mind-blowing. I wasn't expecting an action movie or anything, but for whatever reason I wasn't able to fully engage in the experience of the movie like I usually am able to. So I watched it, I could appreciate the quality film making, but something about it kept me from really engaging with it. I plan to watch it again and maybe I will enjoy it more.
That said, I'm inclined to agree somewhat more with dpg, in that his logline presents more of a hook than just a standard gangster taking revenge logline and better describes the character arc. And I've mentioned many times that I believe the hook is the most important part of any logline, followed by the characters and then goal and other elements.
However, I do think Nir Shelter is right that Michael does develop a clear goal during the story that can be described in the logline. So, some sort blend of your logline attempts could uphold both of the points you two are making.
Here's an attempt:?After an attempt on his father's life, a Marine who wishes to avoid mob life must get revenge and reluctantly take his father's place as the head of a?crime family. (31)

I think combing both of your loglines would best convey the hook and story arc while also clearly defining the goal.

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.

My version takes into account the tragic nature of his character arc. ?How he is inexorably dragged into the family business despite his original intentions to live a different life. ?What elevates the film above the genre, what makes it more than just a gangster film, is that it is a study in character.

In the Act 1 wedding scene, ?Michael tells his girlfriend Kay of how his father intervened to promote the career of the singer Johnny Fontane ?by intimidating a bandleader who wouldn't release Fontane from a disadvantageous contract. ? Then he says, "That's my family, Kay, that's not me."

Oh, yeah?

Ironic last words before he's swept up in events that prove otherwise.

After he makes the fateful decision to take revenge himself ?-- and that is his choice ; nobody asks him to do it, nobody makes him to do it -- Michael proves to be exceedingly competent at executing the family business. ?He is the true heir.

But that was not his original intention. ?"The Godfather" is a tragedy. ?There is no happy ending for any of the principals. ?The plot is a conspiracy against Michael Corleone, against his character, against his fate.

At the beginning of the film, Michael is straightforward and honest with Kay. ?At the end he tells her a bald faced lie. ?That not only dramatizes the 180 degree flip of their relationship but also the 180 degree flip of his character arc.

I see Michael's character arc as ?the story hook, what differentiates the story ?from all other mob movies. What's the story hook in your version? ?That a man does what he has to do to protect his family? ?What's so unique about that? Particularly for a gangster movie?

I readily concede that if the script were being written today, particularly if it was a spec script, not an adaptation of a best-selling novel, it would be a very hard sell. ? The film probably wouldn't get made. ?The idea of a such a character arc is so un-American (and un-Australian), which is to say ?un-commercial. ?Your version might be the way to go in writing and selling the script.

But that's not the script Coppola wrote.

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.

My version takes into account the tragic nature of his character arc. ?How he is inexorably dragged into the family business despite his original intentions to live a different life. ?What elevates the film above the genre, what makes it more than just a gangster film, is that it is a study in character.

In the Act 1 wedding scene, ?Michael tells his girlfriend Kay of how his father intervened to promote the career of the singer Johnny Fontane ?by intimidating a bandleader who wouldn't release Fontane from a disadvantageous contract. ? Then he says, "That's my family, Kay, that's not me."

Oh, yeah?

Ironic last words before he's swept up in events that prove otherwise.

After he makes the fateful decision to take revenge himself ?-- and that is his choice ; nobody asks him to do it, nobody makes him to do it -- Michael proves to be exceedingly competent at executing the family business. ?He is the true heir.

But that was not his original intention. ?"The Godfather" is a tragedy. ?There is no happy ending for any of the principals. ?The plot is a conspiracy against Michael Corleone, against his character, against his fate.

At the beginning of the film, Michael is straightforward and honest with Kay. ?At the end he tells her a bald faced lie. ?That not only dramatizes the 180 degree flip of their relationship but also the 180 degree flip of his character arc.

I see Michael's character arc as ?the story hook, what differentiates the story ?from all other mob movies. What's the story hook in your version? ?That a man does what he has to do to protect his family? ?What's so unique about that? Particularly for a gangster movie?

I readily concede that if the script were being written today, particularly if it was a spec script, not an adaptation of a best-selling novel, it would be a very hard sell. ? The film probably wouldn't get made. ?The idea of a such a character arc is so un-American (and un-Australian), which is to say ?un-commercial. ?Your version might be the way to go in writing and selling the script.

But that's not the script Coppola wrote.

Michael has an overwhelming sense of responsibility to safeguard his family, whether as a result of love for some of the individuals or a sense of duty for them all, his primary concern becomes the family's safety after the attack on Vito. Subsequently, his father's legacy becomes a big part of his intentions as well, something that is directly tied to the family's safety. His trip to Sicily was a necessary part of his action in killing?the chief of police as a means to safeguard his father, without that escape he wouldn't have been able to live long enough to help the family through the ensuing conflict and ultimately become his father's successor.

Michael ordered his brother in law's murder for the sake of the family. Killing the man who beat his sister and seemingly colluded with the enemy is a must for someone like him. Similarly,? after he sees how incompetent his brothers are, he realises he has to take control of the family and succeed his father or it will be destroyed.

The second film, albeit an extension of the narrative, is a different plot and therefore a different story. Still, however, the reason he orders his brother to be killed is again, to safeguard the family as a whole. If he were to let him live and allow people to learn that he knew his brother was responsible for the attack, he would have been seen as weak - a death sentence in that world.

I can very clearly see the events motivating Michael to take actions towards achieving his goal. I think the story in The Godfather, multi layered and complex as it is, can still be summed up with events and action descriptions. While your suggestion, with all due respect (there's a lot there and you know it...) lacks the specificity of his actions and goals which are necessary for understanding Michael's character.
Perhaps, this is something we'll have to agree to disagree on.

I'm head-slapping myself here!

I just realised these are 'Examples'. I kept? wondering why you were all talking about The Godfather and not the writer's logline.

The terrain? has changed since I last visited these shores.

As you were soldiers...