The allusion to Dr. Faustus was obvious. ?And you are correct to assert that a protagonist doesn’t always have to be initially sympathetic, that he can be an anti-hero as long as he is interesting, compelling, competent. ?So that the audience can have the perverse, ?but very real — and bankable — voyeuristic ?pleasure of watching someone being very good at being very bad. ? Like Frank Underwood.

(Or if a comedy, the voyeuristic/sadistic pleasure of laughing at the folly that flows from his flaws.)

Anyway, now it’s clearer what constitutes the the hook of the story: a cabal of demons usurp the Devil to jump start the apocalypse. ?That’s not a bad hook. ?

However, of all the 7 billion people plus on the planet ?in danger of dying, what makes the lawyer the only one qualified to stop it?

He’s rich and greedy — attributes that reflect his back story, that got him to where he is when this story opens, right? But what purpose will rich and greedy serve in driving the plot of your story? ?Frank Underwood’s character flaw, his ruthless ambition, is what drives the series, what is played out in the?present?tense of every episode. How is being rich and greedy going to drive the plot of this story?

What voyeuristic pleasure does this logline promise the reader of the script, the viewer of the film?

(And have you thought about writing this as a comedy? What’s the theme you wish to work out by playing the action out as a thriller?)

fwiw

Isn’t taking down an illegal arms deal a good thing? ?What is the specific dramatic problem it creates? It’s still unclear what the antagonists are up to. ?”Before the private assassins…” ?well, do what exactly?after they find the source?

And what’s at stake?

And what’s the cause-and-effect relationship between the leaker and the assassins?

In less than 30 words. ?If you haven’t already done so, please check out “Training” at the top of the web page for some guidelines on writing an industry acceptable logline.