Have an account? Sign In Now
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
When two robbers conspire to rob from their rich friend’s arts gallery shop, stealing and selling an ancient sculpture to a ghost arts collector. Their success only attracts an endless torment that taunts them and their families until they retrieve and return their friend’s mysterious artifact.
Unfortunately, the logline is defective in several aspects:1] The characters are unsympathetic; there is no redeeming motivation for the theft. The audience has no reason to not want them to suffer. 2] "Endless torment" is vague; there is no clue about the torment that distinguishes from any other tRead more
Unfortunately, the logline is defective in several aspects:
1] The characters are unsympathetic; there is no redeeming motivation for the theft. The audience has no reason to not want them to suffer.
See less2] “Endless torment” is vague; there is no clue about the torment that distinguishes from any other torment inflicted on characters in any other horror film — there is no unique feature, no story hook.
3] “Until they retrieve and return their friend’s mysterious artifact” essentially gives away the ending. ?A logline should never give away the ending.
(REVISED) When a single-minded entrepreneur conducts an unauthorised trial of a ?telepathic phone? in a small town and accidentally transmits a virus that makes everyone lose self-control, she must find a cure with the help of the only uninfected person – a technophobic hippy.
I don't see why a protagonist can't be the source of the inciting incident as long ?the "Doh!" moment is caused by his own ?character flaw. ?Instead of describing the protagonist in this logline as "single-minded", ?I would also describe him as "reckless". ? There is definitely a causal relationshipRead more
I don’t see why a protagonist can’t be the source of the inciting incident as long ?the “Doh!” moment is caused by his own ?character flaw. ?Instead of describing the protagonist in this logline as “single-minded”, ?I would also describe him as “reckless”. ? There is definitely a causal relationship between his character and the dramatic problem.
However, when the character flaw is so obviously the cause of dramatic problem, as in this instance, it can become a problem making the protagonist a sympathetic or likable character. ?In this case, I may be more inclined to root for the uninfected person, not only to solve the dramatic problem but also pop the balloon of the protagonist’s ego in the process, cut him down to size for the “dramatic sin” of hubris in the form of recklessness and single-mindedness. ?
To wit, ?the uninfected person ?becomes the pivotal character — because the protagonist needs him to clean up the mess he created. ?He becomes life-saving hero of the story.
Hmm. ?Maybe the plot and logline should be re-engineered to make the uninfected person the protagonist.
fwiw
See lessAfter being accidentally cryogenically frozen, four Brooklyn hipsters wake up 50 years later to find their neighborhood overtaken by corporations, and must fight to save the last standing bar from becoming a Starbucks.
Okay.Is there any particular reason why it has to be 4 hipsters???Why not just one?And what if he owned the bar when he was accidentally frozen? [Hence, bigger stakes, greater emotional investment.]And what if when he's thawed after 50 years, he discovers it's being sold out to a BBC (big bad corporRead more
Okay.
Is there any particular reason why it has to be 4 hipsters???Why not just one?
And what if he owned the bar when he was accidentally frozen? [Hence, bigger stakes, greater emotional investment.]
And what if when he’s thawed after 50 years, he discovers it’s being sold out to a BBC (big bad corporation) by his granddaughter (as old now as he was then). ?She wants to cash out, take the money and run off to wherever.
But he wants to keep he started the bar, ?and because it’s the an island of familiarity in what has become for him an alien world. ?[Again, bigger stakes for the character, more emotional investment in the outcome.]
And what if he has 30 days to raise the money to match what the BBC is offering.?[A ticking clock to amplify the urgency.]?
Whatever. ?Anyway, ?I suggest the story — and logline — would be stronger if : 1]) It were to focus one 1 hipster instead of an ensemble of 4; and ?2) he’s the original owner, struggling to hold on to his past in more ways than one; and 3) There’s a ticking clock.
fwiw.
See less