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.
An international smuggling maverick risks everything on an project that could catapult him into the big leagues, if his competition doesn't catch up with him first..
I agree; more specificity with regard to the specifics of the job is paramount, particularly considering that this sounds like a wonderfully nuts-and-bolts caper film with lots of authentic (and specific) logistical detail. You could possibly sacrifice the "catapult him to the big leagues" part if yRead more
I agree; more specificity with regard to the specifics of the job is paramount, particularly considering that this sounds like a wonderfully nuts-and-bolts caper film with lots of authentic (and specific) logistical detail. You could possibly sacrifice the “catapult him to the big leagues” part if you needed the space, and simply describe who the maverick is, exactly what the job is, and who he’s up against.
On the technical side, “an project” needs to be “a project”, I reckon you could lose the comma after “big leagues” and why are there two full stops at the end? Perfect technique is a cornerstone of loglines – who wants to read the script of a writer who can’t even get a sentence right?
See lessA secret ill-fated love between a Native-American man and young impressionable Irish woman is torn apart by a grave murder and an ever impending civil rising.
The bedrock concept has been done to death but I think the execution - a Native American man and an Irish woman, in Ireland around the time of the uprising - gives it enough freshness to make this worthwhile. Technically speaking it's a solid logline, but there are a few adjective double-barrels I tRead more
The bedrock concept has been done to death but I think the execution – a Native American man and an Irish woman, in Ireland around the time of the uprising – gives it enough freshness to make this worthwhile.
Technically speaking it’s a solid logline, but there are a few adjective double-barrels I think you could do without. Cut “ill-fated” and leave “secret”: the later reference to their love being torn apart tells us all we need to know about their love’s fate. Is there a way you can combine “young” and impressionable” to keep the sentence moving briskly? In a pinch you could say “impressionable Irish girl” but “girl” might too young a connotation. Maybe jsut go with “young”? Youth, after all, suggests impressionability. The word “ever” used in the context in which it’s used here is rarely necessary, too, and personally speaking I don’t think it ever looks good, so I’d cut that. Also, is it both the murder and the uprising that tear their love apart or is it mostly the murder? If so, you could make this really snappy by establishing the Easter rising as the backdrop up front and then using that to lead into the specific story detail, something like, “In the build-up to the 1916 Easter rising, a secret love between a Native-American man and a young Irish woman is torn apart by a grave murder.”
That’s all contingent on the rising not taking a central role in ruining their relationship, however. Either way there’s certainly some tightening up you could do, but it’s a good start.
See lessBack in his small hometown, a famous psychiatrist turned writer has to challenge his beliefs and rationality while struggling with his past demons when he's asked to work with a patient and his long lost friend, Tracy who's charged with murder but claims that her friend time-traveled.
Whoa, bit of an info-dump here. I sympathise with the desire to get as much across as possible but I think for the sake of clarity and brevity you could lose some length without losing impact. How important is the fact that he's now a writer? Could he simply be "retired"? And do we need to know he'sRead more
Whoa, bit of an info-dump here. I sympathise with the desire to get as much across as possible but I think for the sake of clarity and brevity you could lose some length without losing impact. How important is the fact that he’s now a writer? Could he simply be “retired”? And do we need to know he’s famous? How famous do psychiatrists get anyway? Also, can you get away with leaving out the “struggling with his past demons”? Challenging his beliefs and rationality suggests enough of a struggle to be compelling, and mentioning the demons of his past without telling us how they relate to the case is a bit too confusing, I think. Also the last section, about Tracy, is awfully confused. From it I get that Tracy has been gone a while, has obviously returned and is now charged with murder – but is claiming he/she time-traveled. Is that the case? If so, it took a few read-throughs to glean. Either way, it needs serious tidying up. Also, how does the time-travel angle relate to the murder? Is Tracy using it as an alibi, or an explanation as to why it looks like he/she murdered someone? And you say “a patient”. Whose patient? Is it one of the phsychiatrist’s former patients and that’s what stirs up past demons?
I guess you can tell from the above that, for me, the logline raises more questions about what the story is than it answers. You do get a very basic idea of the story across but it’s too confused right now to work as a logline. There’s obviously quite a bit of info you need to impart and your space is tight so it’s going to be a struggle. You need to drill right down to the bedrock of the story and figure out exactly what the most important details are – what can go and what absolutely must stay. Then re-write the logline. Best of luck.
See less