To put her royal beloved on the throne, a young and ambitious mistress has to plot against his elder and much more charming brother.

Sounds interesting, but it's a book, not a movie.

http://www.allreaders.com/topics/info_15054.asp

Apparently she's trained into a ninja...

You might be interested in the book Assassins of Tamurin.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Assassins-Tamurin-S-Tower/dp/0380806215/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
An young orphan is groomed by a vengeful mother of an orphanage into hating the current ruler. Sent to spy on him and undermine him, she falls in love him.

"When an ambitious concubine plots to supplant the rightful heir to the throne with her lover, she realizes her pray is her one and only love."

what about this: 'As the king lies dying, an ambitious concubine plots to supplant the rightful heir to the throne with her lover, while trying hard not to fall in love with her prey'

Well, the brother that wants to seize the throne is a badass in my story...
I'll tell in short: this story is about a concubine who's sent by her lover to kill his brother, but as time goes, she starts to fall for his charms, the midpoint of the story is when she realizes she's in love with him, she can't kill him. So from the midpoint, she'll start to protect him, I call it a change of direction... So, the feelings do play a role in this story, but how can I add that to my logline?

dpg, great re-writes, I like how you upped the ante' with the king on his death bed.

Adele93: It's not that there is no place for emotions in a logline, it's just they should be integral to the story.

For instance in Romeo and Juliet you have two young lovers who fall in love but can't be together because their families blood feud. There is emotion in that.

If for instance the younger brother in your story looked up to the older brother and they were close (Best friends even) then there would be emotions when concubine tries to usurp the older brothers rightful place.

He would be torn between the woman he loves and the brother who he has always looked up to.

Anyway, just some thoughts on my part.

Aah, so, in a logline emotional elements have no value, I got it. I have only to tell what she wants and intends to do, but if she'll really do it or not, it's not for the logline to tell? I like the first one: "As the king lies dying, an ambitious concubine plots to supplant the rightful heir to the throne with her lover."

Thank you all for your help! :D

>> whose strongest weapon seems to be love.?

Love for whom?

Whatever it means, while it may be a necessary ingredient of the story, it is superfluous for a logline. It's maddening not to be able to embellish a logline to convey the richness and emotional tone of a story, but that's not its purpose. A logline's function, it's only job, is to state the essence of the story -- just the plot ma'am, just the plot.

I think Richiev's logline says all that needs to be said. Although I might tweak it to say more explicitly that the king is not just ill, but dying.

As the king lies dying, an ambitious concubine plots to supplant the rightful heir to the throne with her lover.

(19 words)

Or, if she's trying to hasten the king's demise:

An ambitious concubine plots to poison the king and supplant the rightful heir to the throne with her lover.

(20 words)

I see what you mean, what do you think of this one?

"To please her royal lover and to seize the throne for him, an ambitious mistress wants to eliminate his elder, cruel yet charming and entrancing brother."

I couldn't tell from the logline whether the mistress (aka: concubine) was scheming to supplant the rightful heir with her son or her lover. Either way is doable, I guess.

When I said your story fall in the same mould, I meant that it falls in the same category or archetype of story.
Every story falls in a specific archetype: sacrifice, rise and fall, monster within, the metamorphosis, the chase, the revenge ...
What make them unique if your treatment. Don't worry about unfilmable, if your vision is clear in your head then it can be filmed.
In your treatment of the Machiavelli mistress, love may be the most important thing.
However you may show it only in a few scenes, before a big finale.
Don't forget that the only thing that a spectator can see is her actions. From what you describe, her actions are political actions in the sense of meddling into the political landscape of her kingdom. Maybe it is a terminology issue. But to me, she is performing politics in the name of love.
She is the bitch from hell, bribing, killing all, but all will be forgiven if at the very end you show her for what she really is: a woman in love ready to do anything for the One and who ultimately is betrayed.

Talking about revisiting classics and presenting them in a new light, I am looking forward to Angeline Jolie's Malefice. A new take on Snow White in which the witch is the heroine/protagonist.

Omg, Richiev, you just gave me a wonderful idea! Thanks!

"When the king falls ill, an ambitious mistress plots against the rightful heir to place her lover on the throne."

But then we can say "The White Queen" fits also in the same mould... But that doensn't mean it can't be filmed.
You said the most important part of the serie is the politics, but my story is more about love than politics. I can't tell you the whole story, that would be too long... But what I can tell is that she'll fall in love with her pray, so, how do you kill someone you love?

It may fit into the same mould, but do people not love it? I have seen "The White Queen" and I love it, just to see who will win at the end, will it be as they have planned?
My story is also about Vlad the Impaler, he is the brother that has to be killed. When people think of Dracula, the first thing is on their mind is the vampire, but he wasn't one... He was the Prince of Wallachia, a cruel one, I admit it, but he was a human being. The movies I've seen so far about him are a bit boring (my opinion), so I wanted to write an interesting one. :D

Nicolo Machiavelli wrote "The Prince", usually the first book about politics without any moral connotation. In short if you can't rule by being a saint, just do things underhand and swiftly. Be prepare to use any underhand and ruthless tactic to reach the power. However once in power, don't overuse torture and any such nasty tactic otherwise people will never forget your initial misdeeds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prince
A Machiavelli mistress is the mistress that uses any tools (beauty, sex, family, money, torture) to get what her lover want. In most case he used her to get what he wanted while hiding his nasty side behind her. Once he does not need her, he discards her in the most humiliating way. For example, mary her daughter/niece, force her into a convent, convict her of unacceptable acts. History is littered of women who thought they were playing kingmaker and then suddenly realised they were mere pawn.
I can't remember in which book or piece of theater, but the following dialogue.
Her: But I am your queen
Him: No. You were my queen. I can always get a new queen.

Game of Throne series is a fantasy fiction but rather than magic the most important part of the s?rie is the politic. Everybody plot against everybody.
Here is a quote that resume the s?rie:
When you play a game of throne, you win or you die.

Your script would fit into the same mould.

Sorry for the question, but who's a Machiavelli mistress? :D
Well, I'm not watching Game of Thrones, but I know it's a fantasy movie, mine isn't. It's about real historical figures.

She will get her comeuppance, at the end of the story, but it will not be her royal lover that will punish her.
And I think with 'opportunist' you mean the girl? Cause she's the main character, she's the protagonist in this story.

This mistress is used as a pawn, she really believes her royal lover loves her, she wants to be his wife. Those are her personal goals and he uses her desire to his advantage. He wants the throne of Wallachia and to get that, he has to get rid of his brother, who's already on the throne.

The moral premise is: "Sacrificing yourself for someone who pretends to love you, leads to deception and deep sorrow, but offering yourself to someone who admires you, leads to inner satisfaction and happiness."

Does that make any sense? :D

From your description, she looks like some kind of Machiavelli mistress. A bit like in Game of Throne.
Will she get her comeuppance?
Is your movie a rise and fall of an opportunist?

Which is the first one? " An ambitious mistress, driven by the love and promises of her royal lover, plots against his elder and more charming brother to seize the throne.?

And yes, he will play a role in the third act twist, but first he'll let her do the dirty work for him, using her as a pawn..

I like the first one. Quick question: is the lover in on the plot?

hmmm, or maybe: "An ambitious mistress plots against her royal lover's elder and more charming brother to seize the throne for him."

or maybe 'to gain the throne for him'

I really like your proposals, thanks for help!
What do you think about this one?

"An ambitious mistress, driven by the love and promises of her royal lover, plots against his elder and more charming brother to seize the throne."

"To put her royal beloved on the throne, an ambitious mistress plots against his more charming elder brother."

"An ambitious mistress plots against her royal lover's brother to seize the throne for him."

Not great, but a little shorter. In a logline you don't need phrases such as "has to" because the character should obviously have to do something in order to achieve their goal.

Also, action verbs like "seize" give the sentence more force and help clearly define the goal.

Hope that helps.

I've changed the plot a little bit, so I thought it would be better to put new logline... :D