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.
Los Angeles, 1956. An ambitious prosecutor wants to know why the police were so eager to close the file on the suspicious death of a wealthy businessman. When his off the books investigation uncovers a link between that case and the murder of a young prostitute twenty years earlier, both his career and his life are endangered.
Thanks for taking the time to crit my logline. All of the issues you mention are addressed in the script, but, unfortunately, I didn't have room to include them in my logline. The prosecutor, Dev Stone, is about to try the businessman for bribing public officials when the guy turns up dead, an apparRead more
Thanks for taking the time to crit my logline.
All of the issues you mention are addressed in the script, but, unfortunately, I didn’t have room to include them in my logline.
The prosecutor, Dev Stone, is about to try the businessman for bribing public officials when the guy turns up dead, an apparent suicide. The thing is, the businessman had called Dev a few hours before his death to offer information on a twenty year old murder in exchange for leniency at sentencing. He doesn’t give any details about the murder at that point, but he does imply that Dev’s father, the Chief of the LAPD, is involved (turns out, the Chief killed a teenage prostitute back in the day when he was a detective).
The cops close the case quickly; Dev thinks too quickly. Dev smells a rat because the businessman sounded like he had a get out of jail card, so why would he off himself? He also senses an opportunity for a case even bigger than the first one. He begins his own, unsanctioned investigation, getting resistance from the cops, including his father, all the way.
Given your expertise with the LAPD, may I impose and ask you a question? I noticed in “LA Confidential” that the detectives were referred to either as “officer” or by their rank. Is that accurate or should they be addressed as “detective”? Thanks.
See lessLos Angeles, 1956. An ambitious prosecutor wants to know why the police were so eager to close the file on the suspicious death of a wealthy businessman. When his off the books investigation uncovers a link between that case and the murder of a young prostitute twenty years earlier, both his career and his life are endangered.
Thanks for taking the time to crit my logline. All of the issues you mention are addressed in the script, but, unfortunately, I didn't have room to include them in my logline. The prosecutor, Dev Stone, is about to try the businessman for bribing public officials when the guy turns up dead, an apparRead more
Thanks for taking the time to crit my logline.
All of the issues you mention are addressed in the script, but, unfortunately, I didn’t have room to include them in my logline.
The prosecutor, Dev Stone, is about to try the businessman for bribing public officials when the guy turns up dead, an apparent suicide. The thing is, the businessman had called Dev a few hours before his death to offer information on a twenty year old murder in exchange for leniency at sentencing. He doesn’t give any details about the murder at that point, but he does imply that Dev’s father, the Chief of the LAPD, is involved (turns out, the Chief killed a teenage prostitute back in the day when he was a detective).
The cops close the case quickly; Dev thinks too quickly. Dev smells a rat because the businessman sounded like he had a get out of jail card, so why would he off himself? He also senses an opportunity for a case even bigger than the first one. He begins his own, unsanctioned investigation, getting resistance from the cops, including his father, all the way.
Given your expertise with the LAPD, may I impose and ask you a question? I noticed in “LA Confidential” that the detectives were referred to either as “officer” or by their rank. Is that accurate or should they be addressed as “detective”? Thanks.
See lessLos Angeles, 1956. An ambitious prosecutor's investigation into the suspicious death of a wealthy businessman uncovers the murder of a young prostitute twenty years earlier. His suspects in both crimes: the mother of the girl he loves and his father, the Chief of the LAPD.
I just wrote a reply to this, but I'm not sure it posted, so I'll try it again. Thanks for the crit, dpg. It's funny you should bring up the roles of prosecutor vis a vie the police. I have an exchange of dialogue about that in the script. The prosecutor does indeed investigate on his own, but that'Read more
I just wrote a reply to this, but I’m not sure it posted, so I’ll try it again.
Thanks for the crit, dpg. It’s funny you should bring up the roles of prosecutor vis a vie the police. I have an exchange of dialogue about that in the script. The prosecutor does indeed investigate on his own, but that’s obviously not being revealed in the logline. The points in your last paragraph are extremely helpful and they’ll be helping to shape the next version of my logline.
See less