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.
Three cops, bitter rivals, fight each other and a corrupt system to unravel a conspiracy to take over organized crime in 1950’s L.A.
Or, for those who clamor upon an inciting incident: After a bloody late night massacre, three cops, bitter rivals, fight each other and a corrupt system to unravel a conspiracy to take over organized crime in 1950?s L.A. (29 words) However, I would point out that the massacre at the Night Owl coffeeRead more
Or, for those who clamor upon an inciting incident:
After a bloody late night massacre, three cops, bitter rivals, fight each other and a corrupt system to unravel a conspiracy to take over organized crime in 1950?s L.A.
(29 words)
However, I would point out that the massacre at the Night Owl coffee shop ?occurs about 30 minutes into the film; it kicks off?the 2nd Act of the film. ?Almost the ?entirety of the 1st Act focuses on the bitter rivalry among the 3 principals and corruption within the police department.
See lessAfter a special forces operative witnesses experiments on soldiers & prisoners, he abandons a promising military career & returns to the quiet life. But when a deadly outbreak reeks of government conspiracy & threatens his family, he jumps into the fight to expose the culprits & track down the cure.
>>>>finds out through back channelsI think it would ?make for a more powerful and interesting story for him to find out ?by being on the front line, not through 6 degrees of separation from the front line via back channels.By powerful I mean being on the front line intrinsically makes thRead more
>>>>finds out through back channels
I think it would ?make for a more powerful and interesting story for him to find out ?by being on the front line, not through 6 degrees of separation from the front line via back channels.
By powerful I mean being on the front line intrinsically makes the issue more personal for the protatonist; it intensifies his emotional experience and gives him greater emotional stakes. ?And vicariously through the psychological conduit of empathy for him, it intensifies the audience’s emotional experience as they watch the story unfold.
Also, what is the story hook, the concept that differentiates this story from others about epidemics? ?Like “Contagion” (2011) which also involved the CDC?
See lessAfter a special forces operative witnesses experiments on soldiers & prisoners, he abandons a promising military career & returns to the quiet life. But when a deadly outbreak reeks of government conspiracy & threatens his family, he jumps into the fight to expose the culprits & track down the cure.
Okay, the situation is a little clearer. ?However, ?I still have more questions than answers:1]"government funded plot" -- do you mean to say the contagion was released as a premeditated conspiracy? ?Or was it an accident, an experimental program that ran amuck? ? ?If the former, why would the U.S.Read more
Okay, the situation is a little clearer. ?However, ?I still have more questions than answers:
1]”government funded plot” — do you mean to say the contagion was released as a premeditated conspiracy? ?Or was it an accident, an experimental program that ran amuck? ? ?If the former, why would the U.S. government — any government other than North Korea — intentionally unleash a contagion on the world?
2] I fail to see a sufficient dramatic congruency between the protagonist and the problem. ?By way of clarification through contrast: what if the protagonist were a biologist, a virologist? ?He would have more expertise than a mere investment banker to know how potentially dangerous the program was. ?His premonition is “better qualified”, believable. ?He would have far more justification to feel guilty because he really knows better. ?He might have been directly involved in the program. ?Hence, not only more knowledgeable to speak out, but also in closer proximity and involvement in the program to try to stop it.
But an investment banker? ??He’s a character out of his depth, his field of expertise. I would have no expectation that he would comprehend the full gravity of the program. ?And if you expect an audience to think otherwise, then you’ve got to expend ?dialogue to explain to the audience how he came to know about the program in the 1st place, how he knows enough about the biology to be so concerned. ?Whereas if he’s a biologist or virologist working on the program — all that is explained by his job title.
3] The rule of thumb is that a logline should explicitly state an objective goal, but the subjective need is only implied (usually by the character flaw). ?So it might be better to imply the subjective problem by means a statement of his character flaw — “a guilt-ridden biologist must survive…”
4] If indeed he has a deserved burden of guilt to bear for the epidemic, then the story needs to give the protagonist an opportunity to not just save his own life but redeem himself by saving the lives of others. ?(Unless ?you are proposing a tragedy with no salutary, redemptive denouement for the protagonist.) ?Which a virologist might be able to do. ?But an investment banker? ?What can he do besides wallow in guilt, save his own life while the world goes to hell in a viral holocaust.
So shouldn’t his objective goal be to atone for his complicity by saving mankind — not just himself?
fwiw
See less