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.
An immature government programmer’s promotion is denied by his overbearing boss, so he resorts to childish pranks with his beleaguered coworkers in the hope he’ll get transferred.
NikkiArcane:In response to your questions:No. Yes. ?Yes. Yes. ?(And you?)Contract employees can be easily gotten rid of ?because they don't have civil service protection. ?I saw that happen (too) many times in IT. ?"Snivel" service?employees are, of course, harder to get rid of. ?Actually, practicalRead more
NikkiArcane:
In response to your questions:
No. Yes. ?Yes. Yes. ?(And you?)
Contract employees can be easily gotten rid of ?because they don’t have civil service protection. ?I saw that happen (too) many times in IT. ?”Snivel” service?employees are, of course, harder to get rid of. ?Actually, practically impossible to get rid of after they pass probation unless they commit a felony.
So yes, lateral arabesque transfers to another department are a tried and true method of dumping problem employees somewhere else.
But I suggest that to optimize the dramatic conflict in your premise, the protagonist’s nemesis should be a worthy one. ?In this case, one malicious and competent enough to make life a bureaucratic hell for the protagonist. ?So that the harder he tries to get transferred, the harder his boss games the system to block him. ?And ?get retribution with the 1,001 petty bureaucratic rules and procedures he can inflict on him. (I’ve seen that happen, too.)
IOW: I suggest the boss should come off as a genuine foe, not merely a comedic foil, an oh-so-convenient plot pi?ata. ?Make it ?a credible threat that the boss and the system can crush the employee. ?(Because it does all the time, as I presume you well know.)
There’s a rich vein of dark comedy to mine in the situation. ?Good luck mining the ore.
fwiw
See lessAfter a near drowning awakens an ability to commune with evil spirits, (12) a cowardly teenager must struggle to resist when a bushfire causes unbearably hot summer nights. (27)
Similar reaction to Richiev and Foxtrot25. ?The brush fire element just doesn't make dramatic sense to me. ?By dramatic sense, I mean the problem doesn't seem to logically follow from the initial situation and inciting incident. ?I don't see the cause-and-effect relationship between nearly drowningRead more
Similar reaction to Richiev and Foxtrot25. ?The brush fire element just doesn’t make dramatic sense to me. ?By dramatic sense, I mean the problem doesn’t seem to logically follow from the initial situation and inciting incident. ?I don’t see the cause-and-effect relationship between nearly drowning and the fire. Or communing with evil spirits and the fire.
And he’s cowardly, but all he needs to do to overcome that flaw is to “resist”? ?And resist what?
Resist may be a necessary 1st step, but I think the action line should be about more than merely resisting. As the protagonist, what proactive, forward moving step must he take?
fwiw
See lessAfter an asteroid hits the earth and wipes out half the planet, a scientist must find a way to keep humanity from freezing to death by harnessing the earth’s core.
I take your point, Dkpough1. ?Frankly, I am occasionally torn between doing a just by-the-checklist review of the structure of the logline (protagonist, inciting incident, objective goal, antagonist/obstacle) and the curiosity to probe a little deeper for?substance. ?Specifically, how credible is thRead more
I take your point, Dkpough1. ?Frankly, I am occasionally torn between doing a just by-the-checklist review of the structure of the logline (protagonist, inciting incident, objective goal, antagonist/obstacle) and the curiosity to probe a little deeper for?substance. ?Specifically, how credible is the underlying premise? How well has the logic been thought through? ?How well has it been researched?
Bringing passion?to a story is necessary, of course. ?But is it sufficient? ? These days audiences are more sophisticated, less credulous. ?Story concepts ?for certain genres , like scifi, that could get made into movies — that did get made into movies a few decades ago — would have a harder time getting a green light today.
One reason so many of Michael Crichton’s science fiction books (like “The Andromeda Stain”, “Westsworld “, “Jurassic Park”) got adapted into movies — very successful movies — even became franchises — was because the story premises were credible. ?His stories are flights of fantasy, of course, but flights launched from a solid foundation of thoroughly researched scientific fact.
No one posting here is obliged to explain ?the underlying logic or factual basis that makes their concept credible. ?However, if they can’t provide a plausible explanation, it’s not a problem I create by raising the question. ?The problem lies with the premise. ?My inquiry may just be putting a spotlight on it.
See less