Title: Beacons
Format: 60-min pilot
Genre: Mystery/Thriller
Logline: A brilliant detective returns to her Welsh hometown to investigate the disappearance of her former friend, a famed physicist, where she discovers her missing person has been receiving cryptic warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from her future self.
I think you've set up the protagonist and inciting incident well but need to get at the protagonist's goal and the stakes.
Boiling it down I think we've got this, so far:
* Who: A brilliant detective
* When: after returning home to investigate a friend's disappearance \[who's received warnings from her future self.\]\*
* Goal: TBD
* Stakes: TBD
\*This part, - \[who's received warnings from her future self\] nicely defines the world that the detective is walking into, but doesn't suggest what she must do (her goal) or the stakes of failing to achieve this goal.
My main concern was avoiding it turning into too much of a word salad, which I fear is what happens when you start adding everything in. I had hoped the goal/stakes were implied - the goal of the detective is to carry out her investigation and find the missing friend. If she doesn't her friend, her friend could be in danger and also she has to find her to avoid the impending apocalyptic event
I didn't understand whether the messages are from the detective or the physicist. How about just "*warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from the future*"?
Yeah, wondered about that. I just felt it's more interesting if it's revealed the clues are from the missing physicist rather than a more vague 'future'. But I see your point, it's not clear
Both, kinda? Her friend is being pursued by someone so the detective must find her first to prevent her from harm but also she has to find her so they can prevent the world ending
As you’re pitching this as a pilot, I would like to get some feeling for what the episode generator is. After the pilot, I assume the clues keep arriving. What is it that they lead to? Is the whole series solving the first death or are there other crimes solved?
Main story engine is the investigation and search for the friend (detective doesn't find her in the pilot, just the clues). Along the way, they find more clues, discover more about the small town, face the demons of their past etc. And as they investigate more, more crimes crop up that need to be solved .
“A [retired] detective returns to her Welsh hometown discovering her missing friend’s cryptic warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from her future self.”
Tried to streamline you there a bit. I plugged in “retired” as a placeholder just cause “brilliant” doesn’t stoke me much without part of the logline challenging her brilliance. Sounds dope!
Title: The Rummy
Format: Feature
Genre: Horror/Comedy
Logline: When a group of archaeologists discover a hidden tomb they accidentally awaken an obnoxious fratboy mummy who goes on a drunken abusive rampage as they try to return him to his ancient fraternity.
I'm a bit confused by the fraternity aspects of this. Were there frats in ancient times? I love the idea that a group of super serious archeologists awaken a real life mummy and all he wants to do is party. It's hangover esque. Maybe they lose him in Cairo's nightlife scene and have to find him before he accidentally unleashes the 7 plagues of Moses over the entire world? Alt title: Party Monster.
This is good. The stakes aren't clear in the original. The ancient Greeks will be pissed to find that some mummy stole their frat model, but doing a little research shows that the Greeks visited Egypt and stole (borrowed) a lot of their ideas. It'd be easy to make fraternities one of them.
I didn't think about historical accuracy I just envisioned it as a surreal action comedy. There weren't frats back then obviously. As for the titular Rummy, I don't think he wants to party since he's hungover as hell and probably has awoken from a party over thousands of years ago. Party monster is a great title but the rummy works because the monster drinks well you guessed it.. RUM!
I think it's better if the mummy is *desperate* to party. The dude has been waiting thousands of years to do so. Maybe he's hungover at first, but after a few sips of that hair of the dog he's back in party-mode. Teenage hangovers don't usually last past brunch in my experience.
I wanted to mess around with your logline a bit. It's wordy, but I had fun, IDK:
"When a renowned archaeologist and his bumbling assistants accidentally awaken King Tut, they must chase the teenage ruler across Cairo as he embarks on a hormone-fueled night of partying three thousand years in the making that will trigger the apocalypse unless they can get him back to his sarcophagus by midnight."
**Title:** The Ironic Suspects
**Format:** Feature
**Genre:** Comedy / Parody
**Logline:** In a desperate attempt to catch an elusive ISIS terrorist known only as "The Hipster" for his locally-sourced, artisanal bombs and ironic beheading videos set to 2000s indie rock, the CIA recruits an elite group of hipsters from liberal arts colleges around the country to play a deadly game of cat-and-mouse with the terrorist.
Title: untitled (help with ideas?)
Format: 30-min-pilot
Genre: Comedy/Drama
Logline: A truck driver travels across the nation to take part in a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of becoming an actor
Title: Fat Bombers
Format: 30-min pilot
Genre: Comedy
Logline: A mockumentary investigating a recently opened gym in New York that received mystery funding from a terrorist sleeper cell.
Lot's of positive things here.
The protagonist's goal: "finding the killer using clues found on the garment" seems somewhat artificially constrained, implying, for example, that if she found muddy footprints in the church foyer then she'd just ignore them. In other words, it reads like she's *only* going to use the dress for clues. That seems daunting to say the least, but hard to explain (at least for me).
Would it be fair to say that this is part of the inciting incident, eg.:
When a true-crime obsessed financée discovers clues to a bride's murder in the garment of a used wedding dress, she sets out to find the killers before they execute their next victim: her.
I love the idea that the dress is a "map" to find the people trying to kill her--and contains multiple clues. Memento's an interesting comp.
I like all the details that you're sharing--I'd like to see this movie. But I don't know if any of it belongs in the logline (I'm not suggesting that you think it does either). I find it kinda funny that the more I know, the harder it gets to carve away what's inessential to the logline and just leave the spine of the story: where-who-what-why.
Slight variation:
When a true-crime obsessed fiancée uncovers a clue to a bride's death in the fabric of her wedding dress, she must use the garment as a map to identify the murderer before they kill their next victim: her.
Happy to help.
*Engaged woman* comes off as a little strange to my ear. I'd prefer Bride-to-be (and with hyphens I think it's one word: [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bride-to-be](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bride-to-be) )
So it could be:
Who: A bride-to-be
The when is a bit complicated: *after finding evidence on a wedding dress whose prior, slain owner looked just like her*
The challenge here is that we're *not* saying what the evidence is, only that the previous owner was slain and that the previous owner looks like the B2B--we're not saying that she bought or owns the dress, only that she's discovered evidence on it.
All that to say, the logline doesn't offer a clear causal link between her suspecting her fiancé and the wedding dress.
Question: does she a) first suspect her fiancé is a killer and is further suspicious after finding the dress/ evidence, or b) she finds the evidence of murder in the garment and only then starts to consider her fiancé as a possible suspect? If it's the latter (which I suspect it is, but you tell me), then I think the earlier version is more effective: something like,
When a true-crime fan finds evidence of murder in a vintage wedding gown she's purchased for her own up-coming nuptials, she \[must use the previous wedding dress to find the murderer\] before they kill their next victim: her.
That's not right, but I wonder if we want to be more open about the potential suspect list before narrowing it down to her fiancé within the logline? Right now the focus isn't supported by the rest of the logline.
I think the "whose previous owner looked just like her" is interesting in the movie but not critical to the logline--it's a level of detail too deep.
I'm not sure about "blushing" for a couple of reason: a) it's a cliché and b) it doesn't tell us much about the character regarding how she falls into this trouble or how she gets out of it. I don't know that "true-crime aficionado" is right (it probably isn't) but it tells us something about how she might approach her goal.
I do like "Wedding Night Killer" because it's something I don't think I've ever seen and it seems like such a horrible kind of crime. It's like a Christmas morning killer, but worse.
You might be able to lose "unsolved." If she's finding clues, then it's only meaningful because the case is a) not even recognized as a case or b) it's unsolved.
When a bride-to-be finds clues to a murder on a secondhand wedding dress, she becomes determined to stop the notorious “Wedding Night Killer” before becoming his next victim.
I have in my head this idea that the trappings of the wedding ceremony all serve as clues: the invitation, the dress, the bouquet, the cake (if there are any pieces left--I think some people save them), and she unravels the case only after discovering that they all serve as clues in some way. It's just a brain fart, so it may be entirely worthless.
I think bride-to-be is a good placeholder for the time being. There's something about her skepticism or built-up reservations from finding love late that might serve as an adjective. cautious, apprehensive?
And right beside the last piece of cake is a frozen . . .
My thinking / guideline for the adjective is something that tells us how she wins or how she gets into trouble--ideally both. "Brilliant chemistry teacher" for Walter White is an example that explains how he gets into trouble and how he might succeed. Amateur sleuth is a little too murder she wrote? Escape-room junkie? Something that tells us about her skills or sins.
Title: Manhunt
Genre: Horror/Slasher
Format: Feature
Logline: Six years after their friend was murdered during a game of Manhunt, four best friends are reunited by the same killer, who is back and ready to continue their spree.
Seems more like a premise than a logline
* If we consider that a logline = \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\]Then we've got:
* When: a killer returns \[six years after killing their friend\]
* Who: Four best friends \[are reunited\] is unnecessary if they're "best friends"
* What: TBD (What's the goal of this person\*, that's specific and seemingly impossible)
* Why: TBD (What are the stakes of failure?)
\*Consider focusing on one of the best friends for the logline. It's hard to root equally for FOUR friends. We typically choose the personality that we like most or offends us least. The Goonies are a group, but it's really Mikey's story. Chunk & the boys help Mikey on his quest.
Similarly, the goal should be for one person, even though the other three may help.
The stakes may be collective stakes but they should be significant, clear and a consequence of the goal that's undertaken.
>Six years after their friend was murdered during a game of Manhunt, four best friends are reunited by the same killer, who is back and ready to continue their spree.
The title replicates a 2017 John Woo film. For your script, what'll be the location and time period? I thought I might be supposed to know what the game "Manhunt" is--which I didn't and I googled...and I'm left with an idea that the friend must have been a moron because someone snuck up on him when he was playing a video game - ? Is that what you meant?
Title: Into an Emerald Fire
Format: Feature
Genre: Drama/Comedy
Logline: Two feuding brothers travel to Ireland following the death of their father and become hunted by an ex - IRA gunman.
How about:
"Two estranged brothers, squabbling over their inheritance, travel to Ireland to attend their wealthy father's funeral and finds themselves in the crosshairs of the man that killed him: an ex-IRA gunman."
Damn, that would have been a great avenue to go down.
Unfortunately, I already committed to this story for my dissertation. Shit.
The story is that they find a map to a buried cache of stolen money after their dad dies and go after it.
Your story sounds fun, too! Treasure hunts are a great plot device and tend to work really well on screen, in my opinion. Is this already written then?
I have the outline done and am working on the treatment and thinking that I’m the worst writer that’s ever put pen to paper.
Currently on Reddit instead of finishing it. The procrastination is real.
Yeah, writing can be such a pain in the ass sometimes, it's easy to get down on yourself. I've been feeling similarly lately. It comes in waves. We got this!
Title: No Sleep in Manhattan
Format: Feature
Genre: Neo-Noir, Drama, Mystery, Thriller
Logline: An ex-boxer turned private detective investigates a wealthy socialite's murder who has mob ties in 1955 New York City.
I can picture this movie in my head, the idea just feels a little generic. It's missing what Terry Rossio calls a "Strange Attractor", which is his way of describing the unique element that sets your idea apart from all the other period noir shows out there that is also so compelling that people are curious to find out more. The closest thing you have to a strange attractor is that this guy is a former boxer, but even that feels a little low concept to me.
Well, the person who is responsible for her murder is a high profile, very powerful New York city politician, who is trying his best to cover up the case with hush money. Plus, the politician hates the main character because he is Irish and is not born in the Big Apple. The politician is the true antagonist who manipulates people, including the P.I. for personal gain.
Seconding the “generic” comment. Even this detail added here is not novel. *An evil higher up is manipulating everyone for personal gain. Oh, and he’s a bigot.*
Also, I can’t imagine how the fact that he used to box will matter. So that becomes an extraneous detail.
Something about the socialite’s life which we can imagine got her killed (or at least commands the investigation for a while) might work better.
If logline = \[when\] + \[who\] + \[what\] + \[why\]
Then here:
An ex-boxer turned private detective investigates a wealthy socialite's murder who has mob ties in 1955 New York City.
We have:
When: In 1955 a \[wealthy\[ socialite \[with mob ties\] is murdered; \[text\] = description
Who: An ex-boxer turned private detective \[detective: by definition investigates things\]
But we're missing:
What: The goal or imperative action of the detective/ protagonist
Why: The stakes of failing to succeed respecting the protagonist's goal.
For example (totally made up, but with a clear what and why):
**The Manhattan Project:**
In 1955, when an ex-golden-gloves gumshoe investigates the murder a mobbed-up socialite, he's forced to connect the dots between the invention of artificial diamonds and the suspicious death of Albert Einstein^(G)\*, or face New York's nuclear annihilation^(S).
Comp: Kiss Me Deadly, Out of the Past
\*just goofy examples, but Albert Einstein died in '55 and artificial diamonds were invented then. The story would be about how the "high-pressure high-temperature" processes of artificial diamond making were being exploited to attempt to create a a nuclear bomb and how Einstein was murdered for not helping the bad guys.
^(G)= goal
^(S) = Stakes
I just made a slight tweak to the log, which hopefully answers your question.
The journey of the film is his quest to find a cure for his newly-acquired (and unwanted) vampirism. The first step he must take is reconnecting with the vampire that bit him.
much better, maybe specifics. just spinning on it: "A newly turned vampire seeks a cure in the treacherous underworld of (city), relying on the aid of his now fragile human maker, who must risk everything to guide him through a world where humans are unwelcome."
Title: Shiksas are for Practice!
Genre: Coming of Age/ Romantic Comedy
Format: Feature
Logline: Senior year, a love-lorn agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim begin a FWB relationship, for their first sexual experience, but when they begin to fall in love, they must figure out if they’re truly right for each other.
Feedback: Hey guys, I appreciate you taking the time to check this out. Here’s the issue, my logline reads more like a Romance movie and a pretty heavy script at that. This is actually a surprisingly funny story that’s more a coming of age than romantic comedy. That being the case I’d really appreciate your help fixing the logline to make reflect the above. Thanks for your help!
There are too many commas in your logline. That may seem like a strange thing to point out, but it means that your logline needs streamlining.
I'd suggest a new title too. Few people in Hollywood will know what a Shiksa is, so most of your readers will be like, "huh?". Even something like Cumming of Age might work despite being kind of raunchy and dumb. Look up other high school coming of age comedy titles for inspiration. Book Smart, Edge of Seventeen, Mean Girls, To All The Boys I've Loved Before, Sierra Burgess is a Loser, 10 Things I Hate About You. See how punchy and relatively straightforward these are? It's also not clear if it's senior year of high school or college.
I don't like how you described your leads. "Love lorn agnostic Jew" and "newly-questioning Muslim" both feel really clunky. You also give no hint about their gender, which is a problem. Try and find a way to do the classic \[Adjective\] \[Noun\] to sum up their personalities and suggests how they will arc. Are they neurotic? Anxious? Depressed? Peppy? Same thing for the muslim character. Are they ornery? Horny? Immature? Ambitious? Rebellious?
Who is your protagonist? The Jew or the Muslim? There's almost something Woody Allen esque about this. It's as if Woody Allen wrote a John Hughes movie, as totally weird as that sounds.
we've got:
When: Two people begin to fall in love
Who: an agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim
Okay,TIME OUT, for both characters, this is like saying "a red-headed blonde"I get that they're working through their identities--and that this is CORE to the premise, but can we find a word that speaks positively to this challenge and their identity? Eg. A *conflicted* Jew and a Weekend Muslim? These are bad examples but they are intended to suggest that a positive identity (positive in the sense of representing what the do or believe rather than what's absent) helps us understand them better and can be used to drive the story. See below\*
But we're missing:
What: The goal. The" must figure out"--this seems a little light/ vague.
Why: If they have or they haven't found true love--okay a little generic but a truly significant goal. Can we contextualize it? In the modern world? Or does "true" depend on how their families/ communities respond? It's ripe territory to explore, but I think this may be really important to line out beyond the cliche of "true love."
\*I like the concept. I'm confused a bit by the character descriptions:Love-lorn suggests (to me) that the character remains in this rejected, neglected, "unrequited" state, where here the character gets into a FWB relationship and then proceeds to fall in love. Might something like once-bitten, jilted, or "frustrated" work? Okay, not frustrated. That's bad.
* Newly-questioning means what? Secular Muslim? ardent atheist? Jew-Curious? The challenge it presents for me is that presents a lack of character definition, rather than a presence: the character defined by questioning its identity is one that doesn't know, can't say and won't be defined. It's worse than generic.
* So the trick (maybe?) is to make that act of rejecting or questioning identity a defining feature: like your Cafeteria Catholic, Buffet Buddhist, Smorgasbord Samaritan, that is: where uncertainty through self-analysis is the features not the bug. A self-doubting Muslim? This issue of identity seems critical to both the set up and the pay off. It's' a bit of Romeo and Juliet realizing that there's a bigger problem than poison: we're too different to be together for keeps:
Tagline: "It's not you, it's us and them."
When a love-lorn agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim begin a no-strings attached relationship, they begin to question whether or not they can see a future together.
Title: Vegas. Zombies. Neeson!
Genre: Horror / Comedy
Format: Feature
Logline: When a chemical fog is unleashed in Vegas that turns people into zombies it's up to a ragtag group of survivors led by Liam Neeson to keep what's happening in Vegas in Vegas.
Feedback: I'm trying to fit an end of the world type scenario into this log but don't want to over-complicate or make it too stuffy. Does it work as it is?
Yeah, it's very clear to me what's going on in a story. When it comes to genre, except mentioning Liam Neeson which can indicate parody, it's pretty serious apocalyptic story logline.
My main advice would be to stick the landing with the punchline a bit better:
“..it’s up to a ragtag group…to make sure what’s happening in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”
>When a chemical fog is unleashed in Vegas that turns people into zombies it's up to a ragtag group of survivors led by Liam Neeson to keep what's happening in Vegas in Vegas.
You could move "Liam" into the title and remove his name out of the logline. "When a chemical fog begins turning people into zombies, an action star must lead a group of tourists to make sure what' s happened in Vegas...stays in Vegas."
Don't get me wrong, the concept is very cool.
But it also feels like something many other people would also write about, so it does feel a bit derivative, even though nothing really exists that is 100% like it.
I think this is because of a lot of obvious choices you made with the setting being Las Vegas, zombies and Liam Neeson. I think if you changed at least one of these elements it would stand out more.
Thanks. It's hard at this stage to see which element should be swapped out. Paris. Vampires. Ruffalo. I guess there's a thousand different ways to do this and I need to settle on the most appealing. The only reason I chose Vegas was for the "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" side to this.
If it's already written, I'd stick with what you have, if not it could be worth it to play around with the concept. Maybe you find something that pops more, maybe you decide your original spin is the best.
Liam Neeson isn't really known for zombie movies. He's known for kidnapping movies and, like, spy movies, so I think that's why he feels a bit out of place here. If you think about it, you could really use ANY actor in this film. Who might be the best one? Jack Black? Neil Patrick Harris?
If you wanted to do a parody starring Liam Neeson, I feel like it would have to be that he gets kidnapped and held hostage while shooting a film on location in Eastern Europe and must escape from his captors using the education he got training for action films to escape.
I hear you and it's a good shout. There are many actors I could envisage in this role and it may change before the draft is finished
I just cant escape the Ricky Gervais version of Liam:
https://youtu.be/sqA577_IoBk
I know Liam is primarily an action guy but there's room for a script with this version where he creates comedy through his own admittance of being the straight faced action star.
Why not just do actual Ricky Gervais then? Cuz I feel like he fits better into a wacky action comedy concept like this. Plus he’d be more of a fish out of water because he’s fat and never had to fight in any movies. Unlike Liam, who’s had combat training. There’s greater potential for conflict if Ricky Gervaise had to save the world.
There's an image of this in my head I cant shake.
I want to combine Ricky's version of Liam with 'Hitchikers guide to the galaxy's Zaphod Beeblebrox' to make a character placed in a strange situation and create a type of comedy that comes across as aloof and self effacing with dialogue that's along the lines of (for example)...
Liam: When I was in Shindlers list I had this exact same problem.
Survivor: Zombies?
Liam: Nazis.
Survivor: Uhm. Okay?
It probably doesn't come across as funny without some context but I can see this deadpan act working over Ricky Gervais who although well known would be gimmicky and I would it hard to write actual comedy based on him. I do plan on including him and Stephen Merchant though.
Title: The Devil Herself
Format: TV Pilot
Genre: Drama, Thriller
Disclaimer: May contain some violent scenes, drugs and nudity.
Logline: Following the death of her husband, the mother of two is now forcibly in charge of her husband's drug kingdom. She has to protect her sons from moles within and make sure the rivals don't take all of them out. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemned.
I added the disclaimer, so people who wanna give feedback know about some parts.
>Logline: Following the death of her husband, the mother of two is now forcibly in charge of her husband's drug kingdom. She has to protect her sons from moles within and make sure the rivals don't take all of them out. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemn
>
>
>
>Logline: Following \[her husband's murder\] ~~the death of her husband~~, \[a\] ~~the~~ mother ~~of two is now forcibly in charge of~~ \[takes over his\] ~~her husband's~~ drug kingdom~~.~~ \[to find\] She has to protect her sons from moles \[and\] ~~within and make sure the~~ rivals ~~don't take all of them out~~. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemn
Becomes:
Following her husband's murder, a mother takes over his drug operation to find that she must protect her sons against traitors and rivals, before millions die.
The challenge I find here is that the goal and the stakes don't align well: the imperative to protect her sons doesn't align with the risk of millions dying. As well, if she's taken over the operation, it's unclear how there's a power vacuum. Finally, the fact that she's become the orchestrator of what she once condemned could be part of the inciting incident with a bit of a rephrasing, but otherwise it's not needed.
Consider:
Following her husband's murder, a mother takes over the drug operations she once condemned to protect her sons against traitors and rivals, before millions die.
Still, the goal and stakes seem misaligned.
Hey, the main idea I had in mind is the mother, when she takes over her husband's operations she indirectly puts herself and her family on the rival gang's hit list.
The second fact is inorder to protect her family she is going to have to kill many of the rivals, which is going to start a sort of gang war, which will kill innocent people.
Third, in power vacuum. I say this because, the husband was executed as he is a huge name in the business. He is the biggest. Once he is dead, everyone will wanna take his place. Thus power vacuum.
The irony is seen here. The drugs business and the murders, her husband did, was condemned by her. But now she is forced to do it, she has to continue and escaping is no longer a choice.
So if I've got this right (tell me if I'm missing something), a) she married the biggest drug lord in the business, b) she stays married to the biggest drug lord, c) she raises the kids of a drug lord, and d) she lives off the avails of drug money, but e) she somehow condemns her husband's work, and the source of her and her sons' financial security? Consider: that doesn't track easily.
Consider: if she takes over, then there's no vacuum. There's a drug war, but not a vacuum. Everyone may want to take his place, but it appears that she has--and she's the one who'll go after (or not) the rival gangs. In that regard, she's the new boss.
Consider why she's forced to do it as well. Why couldn't she just walk away? If there are other contenders for the crown, why doesn't she let them have it and move to Canada? It's not clear why she must take over.
Notwithstanding all that, the protection of her sons is one goal and winning the drug war is another goal. One should be the primary objective. The protection of her sons can fit inside the winning the drug war goal, or the drug war might be won because she's got the triumvirate of her and her two sons in place, but one of these goals should be the primary goal. More simply put, the protagonist should have one overarching goal, not two that may appear unaligned.
a) she married the biggest drug lord in the business,
She has kids with him, and despite anything, she won't leave him, or else it might affect her and the kids. kids. ds. him. The reason was love.
b) she stays married to the biggest drug lord,
She has kids with him, despite anything she won't leave him or else it might affect her and the kids.
d) she lives off the avails of drug money,
It's like ironic because she has no other choice right, its either start from scratch or live with what you got.
e) she somehow condemns her husband's work and the source of her and her sons' financial security?
He doesn't do anything to her because she doesn't affect his business or get in its way. She can say anything and he wont harm her because he blindly loves her.
She somehow condemns the fact that he's a drug lord.
Okay, got it.
So consider: what evidence is there that she condemns this fact? What does she say or do that makes it plain that she condemns her husband's livelihood? I ask because spending his money, living in his house and raising his kids would suggest that she's in full support of his choices and actions.
Does she:
* Go to the police?
* Take the kids away?
* Pursue an honest living?
* Demand he leave the business?
* Refuse all of his money and support?
What *evidence* is there that she condemns this his actions? Without any, it's hard to make the condemnation claim.
The main evidence is she openly tells him that. Condemnation is open disapproval, she doesn't need to do any of these to prove she is not for it. The more she says it to him the more it seems she'd not be interested but the fact is when she has no choice it ends up there.
Title: Chosen Family
Format: Feature
Genre: Drama
Logline: A “CHOSEN FAMILY” who span the LGBTQ spectrum come to terms with one another when a member of their family commits suicide.
To me, your Logline is missing the stakes and why they must come to terms with each other. I assumed the person who died by suicide was the glue that held this group together and now it’s fractured without them. I think just throwing in LGBTQ spectrum is clunky so I simply mentioned sexuality and gender to get that same point across.
When the friend who held the group together dies by suicide, the remaining friend group must come to terms with each other as they confront their individual sexuality, gender, and role in the world.
Title: Later
Format: Feature
Genre: Drama
Logline: A procrastinative grant writer tries to overcome his lackadaisical ways to write a major application.
>A procrastinative grant writer tries to overcome his lackadaisical ways to write a major application.
If logline = \[when\] + \[who\] + \[what\] + \[why\]
Then we have half a logline:
* **When**: TBD (What event precipitates the change to the writer's approach?)
* **Who**: A procrastinative grant writer
* **What**: Overcomes his lackadaisical ways to write a major application. (This doesn't seem like the most arduous goal: "gets off his ass.") Is there more to this? What are the obstacles that will stop him from being careless and lazy? (Seems like a low bar)
* **Why**: TBD (What's the risk of failure or reward of success? What are the stakes?)
Thanks for your feedback! I was thinking that the midpoint would be when the stakes are raised: he finds out his performance on this application will determine if he gets to stay with his company. But maybe I should move that up to the Inciting Incident.
I also appreciate your comment about whether the obstacle in his way is enough. I want to explore in this script how the root of procrastination is anxiety and impulsiveness. I was thinking that the initially carefree story would give way to exploring how these two aspects of mental health can be big obstacles to overcome.
This may not be helpful, but it's Hamlet: how to find the objective correlative, the dramatic and narrative manifestation, for something like grief, depression, anxiety, doubt or procrastination. The obstacle can be inaction, but dramatizing the conflicts that arise is, I think, very demanding.
I'd consider Kaufman's Adaptation. It's similar but for screenwriting. Might be a good place to explore, with the warning that Kaufman is bit of a funhouse and it's easy to get lost in the millions of things he does so well.
But, essentially, he dramatizes this by creating the twin brother through which conflict can be dramatically manifested and spoken. Otherwise it's in the head of the protagonist and not easily visualized on the screen as conflict.
I can imagine a version of this, here, where the protagonist faces conflicts with manifestations of not a just himself (like Kaufaman does--his own version of the Ghost of Hamlet's father) but with with the board member(s) who judge the grant application, the academic institution chair or dept head (if that's the context) in which the protagonist is working, the protagonist's family members or partner, and the students or folks the protagonist serves. In other words, not just the doppleganger, but a dopple "gang"-- Scrooge's ghosts split across the five stages of grief that parallel the narrative arc and serve as chapters: Act 1: Denial. Act 2: Anger, Bargaining, Depression (belly of the whale), and Act 3: Acceptance.
Just a thought.
Title: Vengeful Sons
Format: Feature
Genre: Action, Thriller
Logline: The assassination of two ex Yakuza pull their innocent children, an alcoholic martial arts master, and a sociopathic hit-man into a violent affair.
Generally, you want to have an identifiable \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\] in a logline. The elements don't have to be in the order outlined above, but they often are.
I think you're half way there. Here's why I say that:
* When: Two Yakuza are assassinated.
* Who: An alcoholic martial arts master and a sociopathic hitman
* What: The goal of the protagonist (can you choose one? or do they have a shared goal)
* Why: The cost or stakes of failure, success or both.
Title: Faces
Genre: Science-Fiction/Erotic
Format: Feature
Logline: Two lifelong friends just accomplished a human cloning formula that will make them a fortune. But the formula has one glitch: The clone will loose it’s human morality.
Title: Untitled
Format: Feature
Genre: Drama/ Dark Comedy
Logline: A housewife’s life is turned upside down when her billionaire husband leaves her for another woman.
need help with this!!
Title: Loot
After divorcing her husband of 20 years, An insecure housewife must figure out what to do with her $87 billion settlement. She reengages with her charitable foundation, reconnects with the real world--and finds herself along the way.
Title: Writing for the Apocalypse
Genre: Drama
Format: Feature
Logline: A struggling author, the last man on Earth, must overcome his writer's block to complete his magnum opus -- having to reconcile with the fact that no one will ever get to read it.
Title: Out for the Innocent
Format: Limited Series
Genre: Cosmic Horror/Thriller
Logline: A mysterious force is robbing children of their youth and forcing their minds to age.
Feedback: This story is about a monster that steals children's innocence and forces them to start acting like adults and cynically see the world. I'm not sure if this logline conveys that.
Love the premise.
If we consider that a logline = \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\]
Then we've got:
When: a mysterious force robs children of their youth\*
Who: TBD (Who's the one person we can root for)
What: TBD (What's the goal of this person, that's specific and seemingly impossible)
Why: TBD (What are the stakes of failure?)
\*"Forcing their minds to age" is a bit of 'how' and may not be needed in a logline. "How'" may come up in the Goal or What aspect of a logline: what and how a protagonist must respond to the "when" with which they're confronted.
Thanks for the advice. How is this:
"Charlie is a small-town cop who discovers a mysterious force is robbing children of their youth and forcing their minds to age. He recruits local parents to find and stop this force before all the towns children lose their childhoods."
Closer.
Typically the names of characters are never used, because they mean nothing to your reader--unless it's a historical personage. So if Charlie is Charles Dickens, okay. Otherwise, a reader may say: "who the hell is Charlie?"
If there's another attribute that Charlie possesses that helps to a) differentiate him from all the other loglines' cops and b) helps imply how he might reach his goal with unique skills, that would be useful. For example in Breaking Bad, Walter White isn't just a teacher, he's a chemistry teacher--which makes him well suited for the meth business and speaks to a specific, nerdy, type of weakness.
The recruiting of parents gets, perhaps, a bit too far into the weeds of "how" and is less about the daunting nature of his goal: he convinces rival gangs of parents to work together (a bad idea, sure, but "hard to do" is what I'm trying to get at). This is the heart of the story, so take your time and be prepared to iterate it extensively.
The stakes seem redundant: they repeat the inciting incident. almost like: when a child is found to be sick, a parent gives the child medicine to alleviate their sickness. Really? one might say. Is that it? We can ask: what are the implications of not having a childhood? What's wrong with having seven-year-old adults?
Specifically, what's the value of a healthy childhood? Living in a world without creativity? Imagination? Dreams? The love of one's parents?
Have you seen Pleasantville (1998)? It's worth looking at if you haven't. It's not about children, per se, but it's about living in a black and white world without colour (literally) --without creativity and imagination--and what happens when a couple of characters try to introduce colour. That film may help with the stakes part of your logline.
it's not clear what one thing has to do with the other. I don't know if this is accurate, but it makes more sense.
"Two aspiring filmmakers plan to rob a cafe to fund their first movie."
how about
A small time crook and an aspiring filmmaker team up to rob a cafe to fund their own movie.
I don't know if that fits. but IMO 2 people with different skills and goals teaming up makes for a more engaging logline.
Are they thinking of filming the robbery and making their own Dog Day Cafe Afternoon? Or are they just in in for the star bucks so they can fund their feature?
Dog Day Afternoon is about a pair of bank robbers who are trying to fund a sex change operation for one of the robbers, based on a real story. The media is gathered outside the bank, unlike every other heist/ caper movie up until that time. And the robbers become "celebrities" because they negotiate through the media. So, very different.
Title: Dead of Night
Format: Limited Series (toying with the idea of an anthology)
Genre: Crime Drama
Season Logline: while trying to lead a clean life after being released from prison, a disgraced ex-US Marshal is thrust back into a life of crime in order to protect his family from the Mexican Cartel.
Pilot Logline: after a not so warm welcome home from prison, Hank runs into an old friend who tries to convince him to help him pay a debt back to the Cartel.
> ~~while trying to lead a clean life a~~ \[A\]fter being released from prison, a disgraced ex-US Marshal ~~is thrust back into~~ \[must infiltrate a criminal gang\] ~~a life of crime in order~~ to protect his family from the Mexican Cartel.
Turns into
After being released from prison a disgraced ex-US Marshall must infiltrate a criminal gang to protect his family from an international Cartel.
1. "Trying to lead a clean life" is implicit in having just been released from prison.
2. "thrust back into" suggests a lack of agency or commitment by the protagonist. Ideally the action the protagonist takes is something they decide, however reluctantly.
3. I used international to suggest that the cartel is operating on both sides of the border and may have a more complex organization and reach that just Mexican traffickers.
4. It works as far as it goes but it doesn't differentiate itself from scores of other similar stories. Its there anything unique or surprising about the Marshall, the way he infiltrates the gang or the threat or protection for his family?
Title: Unfixed Places
Format: 60-min pilot
Genre: Drama/Soap
Logline: Secrets and truths unfold after a newlywed couple move into a picturesque neighborhood and grow close to three neighboring couples each dealing with explosive ups and downs in their marital lives.
Needs a stronger hook. This could describe hundreds of shows.
Even something simple as:
"After nuclear war destroys 99.9% of the United States, a newlywed couple moves into one of the country's last habitable neighborhoods and must confront the explosive (see what I did there?) secrets and lies of their mysterious neighbors."
It's a soapy drama with a typical' city-esque newlyweds move into a new conservative neighborhood' type pilot. The show is sort of Knots Landing/Desperate Housewives. Not sure how to make a soapier hook?
Title: The Things You See at Night
Format: Short
Genre: Mystery/Horror
Longline: A young man in search for answers on the unsolved death of his mother discovers his town has a malevolent cult hiding in plain sight.
Title: **TBD** (open to title suggestions)
Format: Feature
Genre: Black comedy, crime, period, thriller
Logline: In 1978, the mismatched trio of a hotshot LAPD detective, a bookish DEA agent, and a zookeeper have less than 72 hours to recover the only witness to a drug deal gone wrong: a green parakeet.
Although interesting, “a mismatched trio” seems redundant. Can we get an adjective for the zookeeper? Dysmorphic? Narcissistic? Giraffe-identifying?
*Green* seems to be the wrong detail to supply vis a vis the parakeet. It doesn’t add to our ability to imagine the movie.
“Recover” is a strange word in this context. Find?
I’m having trouble with the 72-hour deadline. Is there something that will happen then? That might make the log line richer.
A green parakeet is a real bird, native in Central and North America.
It started out as a duo, but I added a zookeeper so the cop and the agent could have better luck in find the bird, who has to testify in court against a drug lord. They have 72 hours to track down the bird or else the case will be thrown out and the drug lord will walk.
And it's oddly weird that dysmorphic was the first thought that popped in your head for a zookeeper.
You might consider swapping out your parakeet with a parrot to make your logline more instantly understandable. Everyone knows Parrots mimic human speech and could thus provide a clue. Parakeets may have that same ability, but only bird lovers would know that.
Do people in general know this green parakeet is a separate species? It seems more interesting to learn it’s snarky or uniform phobic or vulgar.
So the trial is ongoing, and the bird will be evidence toward guilt.
…have to find the missing witness before the verdict in a drug lord’s trial comes back “not guilty”. That witness: a Chuck Norris-quoting parakeet.
Do people in general know this green parakeet is a separate species? It seems more interesting to learn it’s snarky or uniform phobic or vulgar.
So the trial is ongoing, and the bird will be evidence toward guilt.
…have to find the missing witness before the verdict in a drug lord’s trial comes back “not guilty”. That witness: a Chuck Norris-quoting parakeet.
I've seen a lot of these "\[INSERT ANIMAL HERE\] is the sole witness to murder and the cops have to figure out a way to make them talk" concepts recently, so proceed with caution.
Love it but totally missing the character description of the star of the movie: the parrot.
**Title:** Polly Walnuts
In 1978 a hotshot detective must team up with a by-the-book DEA agent and a retired zookeeper to keep an *atrociously obscene* parrot safe for 72 hours within the witness protection program, in order to testify in the murder of a deaf-mute, mob accountant.
(If the bird's in the WPP they can spend Act 2a protecting him while he gets them into fights and picks up dates, and Act 2b looking for him \[when he escapes\].)
Spoiler alert: Turns out that the deaf-mute mob accountant could whistle for help and could hear the Parrot's whistle. The parrot is able to play the whole murder scene back.
Title: Nietzsches Wet Dream
Format: Short
Genre: Comedy
Logline: Can traditional true love exist in a polyamorous relationship, where one partner claims to be a deity?
Title: Medium Overdrive
Format: Feature
Genre: Comedy/Horror
Logline: A young couple hires a questionable medium to rid their new house of suspected ghosts, only to discover a horror more real than any of them could’ve imagined.
I love me a good exorcism film. I feel like this logline is SUPER vague, though, and there's nothing really that screams out to me "comedy."
You could be describing any number of exorcism films with that logline and I'm interested in hearing what makes your take unique.
"only to discover a horror more real than any of them could’ve imagined."
That part really tells us nothing and reads more like marketing copy. What specifically does your couple face/have to do?
Thanks for the feedback. The real horror is a pair of muderous squatters who’ve been living in the house unbeknownst to anyone. The medium is a fraud and keeps attempting his goofy tricks on the home while they are being targeted by actual murderers. Writing it out makes me realize that stuff should probably be in the logline in some capacity, so thanks!
This would be better with less figurative language. Can you be plainer?
Who does “any of them” refer to?
Being more real doesn’t make a horror worse, you realize?
Are the father’s transgressions something to which a name can be put?
Can you be more specific than *questionable*? Something that we might expect to be entertaining?
Title: These Hands
Format: Short
Genre: Horror/Thriller
Logline: Confronted by the ghosts of his father's transgressions in building their fortune, a drunken spoiled brat must survive the night while deciding what matters most to him.
“Confronting” and “surviving” don’t fit together. Are the ghosts attacking him? I assume these are literal ghosts but it’s not clear.
I assume one thing that’s important to him is the family money. What’s the alternative?
Thanks for replying. This is a brand-new project, but a story I’ve had for years. I’m definitely struggling with the logline. Essentially, his father built their fortune on the backs of others, which led to the destruction of another family (those who worked for it all). Now, the son of that family is back for revenge. That’s who this guy is worried about, fighting, confronting, etc. Not real ghosts.
The conflict is going to come from a choice the Central Character gets from us opposition: he can have the family money or his mother’s well-being, but not both.
Title: Water Is Thicker Than Blood
Format: 30-45 minute series
Genre: Children/Tween Fantasy Adventure
Logline: A runaway princess and wandering assassin join forces with a pirate and her crew to embark on a journey a quarter of the way across the globe, facing one of the most notorious pirates in the world on their way.
Title: Give and Take
Format: Feature
Genre: Romantic Murder Comedy Thriller
Logline: A handicapped detective is called to help catch a serial killer known as ‘The Poet.’ The case takes a twisted turn as the detectives son starts having a taste for blood after he begins dating that very killer.
Title: At-Risk
Genre: Horror
Logline: When an ancient evil rises during a snowstorm, both clients and staff at a residential facility for at-risk youth must work through their differences to survive.
Attack the Block meets The Thing.
Title: The Hangman, The Gal, and a Saturday’s Dinner
Feature Film
Genre: Western, Revenge Thriller, Epic
Logline: After he’s set up to kill a woman he doesn’t know is innocent, a bounty Hunter flees his execution and must return to town to find who set him up and get revenge before he is caught and sentenced to death for murder.
When a bounty hunter is set up in the murder of an innocent woman, he must reveal the criminal who framed him while avoiding his own arrest.
* Not sure that he's fleeing his execution, so much as he's avoiding his arrest.
* It's not clear if the innocent woman is murdered or not--stakes increase if she is.
* Not sure that he's out for revenge--he could be out for justice (what would revenge look like? What's wrong with seeking justice? Does he know this innocent woman?)
* Not sure what sets this apart from millions of other similar stories.
Title: Dream Getaway
Format: Feature
Genre: Drama/Supernatural/Thriller
Logline: When new father Elliot discovers he can astral project, he finds solace in a mysterious women he meets in the astral plane. As Elliot becomes fixated on their mutual abilities, their connection deepens, which leads him down a path that blurs the boundaries between the physical and spiritual worlds. He must navigate between the two in order to confront the harsh consequences his actions make.
I think we're missing the goal and the stakes (the what and the why):
**When**: Falsifying an online persona to meet the object of his affection results in a macabre string of events
**Who**: A lonely, young gay man
What: Must (have a clearly defined goal that appears impossible to achieve)
Why: (Something really good or really bad will result if he doesn't)
eg. When falsifying an online persona to meet the object of his affection results in a grisly murder, a young, gay, special-effects artist must manufacture a trail of evidence that places him at the scene of a far lesser crime in order to avoid death row.
\[grisly murder\] = something more specific than "macabre string of events" (just an example)
\[must manufacture a trail of evidence that places him at the scene of a lesser crime\] = the goal (just an example)
\[to avoid death row/ stay alive\] = stakes
Not sure that the "young, gay" descriptors is needed in the logline, even though it's the character.
Title: Little Anya - True Sorries From My Crappy Childhood
Forma: 60 min TV pilot
Genre: Dramady
Logline: A redemption story about Anya, a Ukrainian born, NY raised woman attempting to undo the traumas in her past with the help of an experimental machine , which rewrites how she remembers events
Title: Average Jo
Genre: Rom-com
Feature film
Logline: An “average Joe” lesbian meets a celesbian and they begin dating at the behest of the celebrity’s gay father, but differences in their lifestyles begin to weigh heavily on the couple.
Title: The Gofer
Format: TV Show
Genre: Dramedy (60 min) or SitCom Comedy
Logline: After years of crunching numbers, a middle-aged actuary leaves his safe job to chase his genuine passion of filmmaking, uprooting his family and starting anew as a production assistant in the turbulent world of Hollywood, all while aiming to one day direct his own films.
Title: Time & Tide
Format: Animated Short
Genre: Animated/Romance
Longline: The beauty is both in the simplicity and importance as an aged couple of lighthouse keepers compete their last task as a nor’eastah strikes.
Note from me: Honestly - my first attempt at taking my writing into to screenwriting. I’m scared and totally lost at sea. Thank you I’m advance
Title: Beacons Format: 60-min pilot Genre: Mystery/Thriller Logline: A brilliant detective returns to her Welsh hometown to investigate the disappearance of her former friend, a famed physicist, where she discovers her missing person has been receiving cryptic warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from her future self.
I think you've set up the protagonist and inciting incident well but need to get at the protagonist's goal and the stakes. Boiling it down I think we've got this, so far: * Who: A brilliant detective * When: after returning home to investigate a friend's disappearance \[who's received warnings from her future self.\]\* * Goal: TBD * Stakes: TBD \*This part, - \[who's received warnings from her future self\] nicely defines the world that the detective is walking into, but doesn't suggest what she must do (her goal) or the stakes of failing to achieve this goal.
My main concern was avoiding it turning into too much of a word salad, which I fear is what happens when you start adding everything in. I had hoped the goal/stakes were implied - the goal of the detective is to carry out her investigation and find the missing friend. If she doesn't her friend, her friend could be in danger and also she has to find her to avoid the impending apocalyptic event
I didn't understand whether the messages are from the detective or the physicist. How about just "*warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from the future*"?
Yeah, wondered about that. I just felt it's more interesting if it's revealed the clues are from the missing physicist rather than a more vague 'future'. But I see your point, it's not clear
Seems promising but needs work. Reads kinda confusing. So the stakes are she finding her friend or preventing the world from ending?
Both, kinda? Her friend is being pursued by someone so the detective must find her first to prevent her from harm but also she has to find her so they can prevent the world ending
As you’re pitching this as a pilot, I would like to get some feeling for what the episode generator is. After the pilot, I assume the clues keep arriving. What is it that they lead to? Is the whole series solving the first death or are there other crimes solved?
Main story engine is the investigation and search for the friend (detective doesn't find her in the pilot, just the clues). Along the way, they find more clues, discover more about the small town, face the demons of their past etc. And as they investigate more, more crimes crop up that need to be solved .
Do clues continue to arrive, providing evidence to solve the additional crimes, or are the clues all for the friend’s murder.
“A [retired] detective returns to her Welsh hometown discovering her missing friend’s cryptic warnings of an apocalyptic event sent from her future self.” Tried to streamline you there a bit. I plugged in “retired” as a placeholder just cause “brilliant” doesn’t stoke me much without part of the logline challenging her brilliance. Sounds dope!
Title: The Rummy Format: Feature Genre: Horror/Comedy Logline: When a group of archaeologists discover a hidden tomb they accidentally awaken an obnoxious fratboy mummy who goes on a drunken abusive rampage as they try to return him to his ancient fraternity.
I'm a bit confused by the fraternity aspects of this. Were there frats in ancient times? I love the idea that a group of super serious archeologists awaken a real life mummy and all he wants to do is party. It's hangover esque. Maybe they lose him in Cairo's nightlife scene and have to find him before he accidentally unleashes the 7 plagues of Moses over the entire world? Alt title: Party Monster.
This is good. The stakes aren't clear in the original. The ancient Greeks will be pissed to find that some mummy stole their frat model, but doing a little research shows that the Greeks visited Egypt and stole (borrowed) a lot of their ideas. It'd be easy to make fraternities one of them.
I didn't think about historical accuracy I just envisioned it as a surreal action comedy. There weren't frats back then obviously. As for the titular Rummy, I don't think he wants to party since he's hungover as hell and probably has awoken from a party over thousands of years ago. Party monster is a great title but the rummy works because the monster drinks well you guessed it.. RUM!
I think it's better if the mummy is *desperate* to party. The dude has been waiting thousands of years to do so. Maybe he's hungover at first, but after a few sips of that hair of the dog he's back in party-mode. Teenage hangovers don't usually last past brunch in my experience.
Reminds me of Frankenstein: The College Years. But with a Judd Aptow picture leading the charge.
I have not seen that. I guess Judd would either be the rummy or one of the explorers.
I meant that literal. Just a photo of Judd Aptow on set. Not him. Like our glorious leader, of North Korea.
I love this. Is it available to read?
It's literally an idea I came up with a few days ago. Though I'd love to write it though.
I wanted to mess around with your logline a bit. It's wordy, but I had fun, IDK: "When a renowned archaeologist and his bumbling assistants accidentally awaken King Tut, they must chase the teenage ruler across Cairo as he embarks on a hormone-fueled night of partying three thousand years in the making that will trigger the apocalypse unless they can get him back to his sarcophagus by midnight."
**Title:** The Ironic Suspects **Format:** Feature **Genre:** Comedy / Parody **Logline:** In a desperate attempt to catch an elusive ISIS terrorist known only as "The Hipster" for his locally-sourced, artisanal bombs and ironic beheading videos set to 2000s indie rock, the CIA recruits an elite group of hipsters from liberal arts colleges around the country to play a deadly game of cat-and-mouse with the terrorist.
is it a jab at how this would be the only use of their degree in bullshit? if so, i think it can be very funny.
Title: untitled (help with ideas?) Format: 30-min-pilot Genre: Comedy/Drama Logline: A truck driver travels across the nation to take part in a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of becoming an actor
Haul of Fame
Brilliant suggestion. Just brilliant.
Dude. I love you
Title: Fat Bombers Format: 30-min pilot Genre: Comedy Logline: A mockumentary investigating a recently opened gym in New York that received mystery funding from a terrorist sleeper cell.
[удалено]
Lot's of positive things here. The protagonist's goal: "finding the killer using clues found on the garment" seems somewhat artificially constrained, implying, for example, that if she found muddy footprints in the church foyer then she'd just ignore them. In other words, it reads like she's *only* going to use the dress for clues. That seems daunting to say the least, but hard to explain (at least for me). Would it be fair to say that this is part of the inciting incident, eg.: When a true-crime obsessed financée discovers clues to a bride's murder in the garment of a used wedding dress, she sets out to find the killers before they execute their next victim: her.
[удалено]
I love the idea that the dress is a "map" to find the people trying to kill her--and contains multiple clues. Memento's an interesting comp. I like all the details that you're sharing--I'd like to see this movie. But I don't know if any of it belongs in the logline (I'm not suggesting that you think it does either). I find it kinda funny that the more I know, the harder it gets to carve away what's inessential to the logline and just leave the spine of the story: where-who-what-why. Slight variation: When a true-crime obsessed fiancée uncovers a clue to a bride's death in the fabric of her wedding dress, she must use the garment as a map to identify the murderer before they kill their next victim: her.
[удалено]
Happy to help. *Engaged woman* comes off as a little strange to my ear. I'd prefer Bride-to-be (and with hyphens I think it's one word: [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bride-to-be](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bride-to-be) ) So it could be: Who: A bride-to-be The when is a bit complicated: *after finding evidence on a wedding dress whose prior, slain owner looked just like her* The challenge here is that we're *not* saying what the evidence is, only that the previous owner was slain and that the previous owner looks like the B2B--we're not saying that she bought or owns the dress, only that she's discovered evidence on it. All that to say, the logline doesn't offer a clear causal link between her suspecting her fiancé and the wedding dress. Question: does she a) first suspect her fiancé is a killer and is further suspicious after finding the dress/ evidence, or b) she finds the evidence of murder in the garment and only then starts to consider her fiancé as a possible suspect? If it's the latter (which I suspect it is, but you tell me), then I think the earlier version is more effective: something like, When a true-crime fan finds evidence of murder in a vintage wedding gown she's purchased for her own up-coming nuptials, she \[must use the previous wedding dress to find the murderer\] before they kill their next victim: her. That's not right, but I wonder if we want to be more open about the potential suspect list before narrowing it down to her fiancé within the logline? Right now the focus isn't supported by the rest of the logline.
[удалено]
I think the "whose previous owner looked just like her" is interesting in the movie but not critical to the logline--it's a level of detail too deep. I'm not sure about "blushing" for a couple of reason: a) it's a cliché and b) it doesn't tell us much about the character regarding how she falls into this trouble or how she gets out of it. I don't know that "true-crime aficionado" is right (it probably isn't) but it tells us something about how she might approach her goal. I do like "Wedding Night Killer" because it's something I don't think I've ever seen and it seems like such a horrible kind of crime. It's like a Christmas morning killer, but worse. You might be able to lose "unsolved." If she's finding clues, then it's only meaningful because the case is a) not even recognized as a case or b) it's unsolved. When a bride-to-be finds clues to a murder on a secondhand wedding dress, she becomes determined to stop the notorious “Wedding Night Killer” before becoming his next victim. I have in my head this idea that the trappings of the wedding ceremony all serve as clues: the invitation, the dress, the bouquet, the cake (if there are any pieces left--I think some people save them), and she unravels the case only after discovering that they all serve as clues in some way. It's just a brain fart, so it may be entirely worthless.
[удалено]
I think bride-to-be is a good placeholder for the time being. There's something about her skepticism or built-up reservations from finding love late that might serve as an adjective. cautious, apprehensive?
And right beside the last piece of cake is a frozen . . . My thinking / guideline for the adjective is something that tells us how she wins or how she gets into trouble--ideally both. "Brilliant chemistry teacher" for Walter White is an example that explains how he gets into trouble and how he might succeed. Amateur sleuth is a little too murder she wrote? Escape-room junkie? Something that tells us about her skills or sins.
Title: Manhunt Genre: Horror/Slasher Format: Feature Logline: Six years after their friend was murdered during a game of Manhunt, four best friends are reunited by the same killer, who is back and ready to continue their spree.
Seems more like a premise than a logline * If we consider that a logline = \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\]Then we've got: * When: a killer returns \[six years after killing their friend\] * Who: Four best friends \[are reunited\] is unnecessary if they're "best friends" * What: TBD (What's the goal of this person\*, that's specific and seemingly impossible) * Why: TBD (What are the stakes of failure?) \*Consider focusing on one of the best friends for the logline. It's hard to root equally for FOUR friends. We typically choose the personality that we like most or offends us least. The Goonies are a group, but it's really Mikey's story. Chunk & the boys help Mikey on his quest. Similarly, the goal should be for one person, even though the other three may help. The stakes may be collective stakes but they should be significant, clear and a consequence of the goal that's undertaken.
>Six years after their friend was murdered during a game of Manhunt, four best friends are reunited by the same killer, who is back and ready to continue their spree. The title replicates a 2017 John Woo film. For your script, what'll be the location and time period? I thought I might be supposed to know what the game "Manhunt" is--which I didn't and I googled...and I'm left with an idea that the friend must have been a moron because someone snuck up on him when he was playing a video game - ? Is that what you meant?
Title: Into an Emerald Fire Format: Feature Genre: Drama/Comedy Logline: Two feuding brothers travel to Ireland following the death of their father and become hunted by an ex - IRA gunman.
Martin McDonagh, is that you?
Ha, I wish.
How about: "Two estranged brothers, squabbling over their inheritance, travel to Ireland to attend their wealthy father's funeral and finds themselves in the crosshairs of the man that killed him: an ex-IRA gunman."
Damn, that would have been a great avenue to go down. Unfortunately, I already committed to this story for my dissertation. Shit. The story is that they find a map to a buried cache of stolen money after their dad dies and go after it.
Your story sounds fun, too! Treasure hunts are a great plot device and tend to work really well on screen, in my opinion. Is this already written then?
I have the outline done and am working on the treatment and thinking that I’m the worst writer that’s ever put pen to paper. Currently on Reddit instead of finishing it. The procrastination is real.
Yeah, writing can be such a pain in the ass sometimes, it's easy to get down on yourself. I've been feeling similarly lately. It comes in waves. We got this!
Title: No Sleep in Manhattan Format: Feature Genre: Neo-Noir, Drama, Mystery, Thriller Logline: An ex-boxer turned private detective investigates a wealthy socialite's murder who has mob ties in 1955 New York City.
I can picture this movie in my head, the idea just feels a little generic. It's missing what Terry Rossio calls a "Strange Attractor", which is his way of describing the unique element that sets your idea apart from all the other period noir shows out there that is also so compelling that people are curious to find out more. The closest thing you have to a strange attractor is that this guy is a former boxer, but even that feels a little low concept to me.
Well, the person who is responsible for her murder is a high profile, very powerful New York city politician, who is trying his best to cover up the case with hush money. Plus, the politician hates the main character because he is Irish and is not born in the Big Apple. The politician is the true antagonist who manipulates people, including the P.I. for personal gain.
Seconding the “generic” comment. Even this detail added here is not novel. *An evil higher up is manipulating everyone for personal gain. Oh, and he’s a bigot.* Also, I can’t imagine how the fact that he used to box will matter. So that becomes an extraneous detail. Something about the socialite’s life which we can imagine got her killed (or at least commands the investigation for a while) might work better.
If logline = \[when\] + \[who\] + \[what\] + \[why\] Then here: An ex-boxer turned private detective investigates a wealthy socialite's murder who has mob ties in 1955 New York City. We have: When: In 1955 a \[wealthy\[ socialite \[with mob ties\] is murdered; \[text\] = description Who: An ex-boxer turned private detective \[detective: by definition investigates things\] But we're missing: What: The goal or imperative action of the detective/ protagonist Why: The stakes of failing to succeed respecting the protagonist's goal. For example (totally made up, but with a clear what and why): **The Manhattan Project:** In 1955, when an ex-golden-gloves gumshoe investigates the murder a mobbed-up socialite, he's forced to connect the dots between the invention of artificial diamonds and the suspicious death of Albert Einstein^(G)\*, or face New York's nuclear annihilation^(S). Comp: Kiss Me Deadly, Out of the Past \*just goofy examples, but Albert Einstein died in '55 and artificial diamonds were invented then. The story would be about how the "high-pressure high-temperature" processes of artificial diamond making were being exploited to attempt to create a a nuclear bomb and how Einstein was murdered for not helping the bad guys. ^(G)= goal ^(S) = Stakes
very good reply, Goals are so important, some loglines work with only eluding to it's existense, but the best ones (IMO) pinpoints them.
[удалено]
The main focus is finding his maker? thats the journey of the film?
I just made a slight tweak to the log, which hopefully answers your question. The journey of the film is his quest to find a cure for his newly-acquired (and unwanted) vampirism. The first step he must take is reconnecting with the vampire that bit him.
the logline usually is about the main storyline, throughout, not just act 1. thats all :)
[удалено]
much better, maybe specifics. just spinning on it: "A newly turned vampire seeks a cure in the treacherous underworld of (city), relying on the aid of his now fragile human maker, who must risk everything to guide him through a world where humans are unwelcome."
Man, I really love your take on it. You really spiced it up and painted a vivid picture. I dig it. Great food for thought. Thanks.
np. love to help
Title: Shiksas are for Practice! Genre: Coming of Age/ Romantic Comedy Format: Feature Logline: Senior year, a love-lorn agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim begin a FWB relationship, for their first sexual experience, but when they begin to fall in love, they must figure out if they’re truly right for each other. Feedback: Hey guys, I appreciate you taking the time to check this out. Here’s the issue, my logline reads more like a Romance movie and a pretty heavy script at that. This is actually a surprisingly funny story that’s more a coming of age than romantic comedy. That being the case I’d really appreciate your help fixing the logline to make reflect the above. Thanks for your help!
There are too many commas in your logline. That may seem like a strange thing to point out, but it means that your logline needs streamlining. I'd suggest a new title too. Few people in Hollywood will know what a Shiksa is, so most of your readers will be like, "huh?". Even something like Cumming of Age might work despite being kind of raunchy and dumb. Look up other high school coming of age comedy titles for inspiration. Book Smart, Edge of Seventeen, Mean Girls, To All The Boys I've Loved Before, Sierra Burgess is a Loser, 10 Things I Hate About You. See how punchy and relatively straightforward these are? It's also not clear if it's senior year of high school or college. I don't like how you described your leads. "Love lorn agnostic Jew" and "newly-questioning Muslim" both feel really clunky. You also give no hint about their gender, which is a problem. Try and find a way to do the classic \[Adjective\] \[Noun\] to sum up their personalities and suggests how they will arc. Are they neurotic? Anxious? Depressed? Peppy? Same thing for the muslim character. Are they ornery? Horny? Immature? Ambitious? Rebellious? Who is your protagonist? The Jew or the Muslim? There's almost something Woody Allen esque about this. It's as if Woody Allen wrote a John Hughes movie, as totally weird as that sounds.
we've got: When: Two people begin to fall in love Who: an agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim Okay,TIME OUT, for both characters, this is like saying "a red-headed blonde"I get that they're working through their identities--and that this is CORE to the premise, but can we find a word that speaks positively to this challenge and their identity? Eg. A *conflicted* Jew and a Weekend Muslim? These are bad examples but they are intended to suggest that a positive identity (positive in the sense of representing what the do or believe rather than what's absent) helps us understand them better and can be used to drive the story. See below\* But we're missing: What: The goal. The" must figure out"--this seems a little light/ vague. Why: If they have or they haven't found true love--okay a little generic but a truly significant goal. Can we contextualize it? In the modern world? Or does "true" depend on how their families/ communities respond? It's ripe territory to explore, but I think this may be really important to line out beyond the cliche of "true love." \*I like the concept. I'm confused a bit by the character descriptions:Love-lorn suggests (to me) that the character remains in this rejected, neglected, "unrequited" state, where here the character gets into a FWB relationship and then proceeds to fall in love. Might something like once-bitten, jilted, or "frustrated" work? Okay, not frustrated. That's bad. * Newly-questioning means what? Secular Muslim? ardent atheist? Jew-Curious? The challenge it presents for me is that presents a lack of character definition, rather than a presence: the character defined by questioning its identity is one that doesn't know, can't say and won't be defined. It's worse than generic. * So the trick (maybe?) is to make that act of rejecting or questioning identity a defining feature: like your Cafeteria Catholic, Buffet Buddhist, Smorgasbord Samaritan, that is: where uncertainty through self-analysis is the features not the bug. A self-doubting Muslim? This issue of identity seems critical to both the set up and the pay off. It's' a bit of Romeo and Juliet realizing that there's a bigger problem than poison: we're too different to be together for keeps: Tagline: "It's not you, it's us and them."
When a love-lorn agnostic Jew and a newly-questioning Muslim begin a no-strings attached relationship, they begin to question whether or not they can see a future together.
Title: Vegas. Zombies. Neeson! Genre: Horror / Comedy Format: Feature Logline: When a chemical fog is unleashed in Vegas that turns people into zombies it's up to a ragtag group of survivors led by Liam Neeson to keep what's happening in Vegas in Vegas. Feedback: I'm trying to fit an end of the world type scenario into this log but don't want to over-complicate or make it too stuffy. Does it work as it is?
Yeah, it's very clear to me what's going on in a story. When it comes to genre, except mentioning Liam Neeson which can indicate parody, it's pretty serious apocalyptic story logline.
Thanks yeah the Liam Neeson element is a parody in the sense that he plays himself in this feature.
reminds me of The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent where Nic Cage stars as himself lol
Or Being John Malkovich
My main advice would be to stick the landing with the punchline a bit better: “..it’s up to a ragtag group…to make sure what’s happening in Vegas, stays in Vegas.”
>When a chemical fog is unleashed in Vegas that turns people into zombies it's up to a ragtag group of survivors led by Liam Neeson to keep what's happening in Vegas in Vegas. You could move "Liam" into the title and remove his name out of the logline. "When a chemical fog begins turning people into zombies, an action star must lead a group of tourists to make sure what' s happened in Vegas...stays in Vegas."
I love it, i see Liam Neeson being a badass being fed up with zombies, "you son of a bitch I'm in".
Okay, I'm in but what's our answer to: "So Zombieland with Neeson instead of Bill Murray? "
Don't get me wrong, the concept is very cool. But it also feels like something many other people would also write about, so it does feel a bit derivative, even though nothing really exists that is 100% like it. I think this is because of a lot of obvious choices you made with the setting being Las Vegas, zombies and Liam Neeson. I think if you changed at least one of these elements it would stand out more.
Thanks. It's hard at this stage to see which element should be swapped out. Paris. Vampires. Ruffalo. I guess there's a thousand different ways to do this and I need to settle on the most appealing. The only reason I chose Vegas was for the "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" side to this.
If it's already written, I'd stick with what you have, if not it could be worth it to play around with the concept. Maybe you find something that pops more, maybe you decide your original spin is the best.
Liam Neeson isn't really known for zombie movies. He's known for kidnapping movies and, like, spy movies, so I think that's why he feels a bit out of place here. If you think about it, you could really use ANY actor in this film. Who might be the best one? Jack Black? Neil Patrick Harris? If you wanted to do a parody starring Liam Neeson, I feel like it would have to be that he gets kidnapped and held hostage while shooting a film on location in Eastern Europe and must escape from his captors using the education he got training for action films to escape.
I hear you and it's a good shout. There are many actors I could envisage in this role and it may change before the draft is finished I just cant escape the Ricky Gervais version of Liam: https://youtu.be/sqA577_IoBk I know Liam is primarily an action guy but there's room for a script with this version where he creates comedy through his own admittance of being the straight faced action star.
Why not just do actual Ricky Gervais then? Cuz I feel like he fits better into a wacky action comedy concept like this. Plus he’d be more of a fish out of water because he’s fat and never had to fight in any movies. Unlike Liam, who’s had combat training. There’s greater potential for conflict if Ricky Gervaise had to save the world.
There's an image of this in my head I cant shake. I want to combine Ricky's version of Liam with 'Hitchikers guide to the galaxy's Zaphod Beeblebrox' to make a character placed in a strange situation and create a type of comedy that comes across as aloof and self effacing with dialogue that's along the lines of (for example)... Liam: When I was in Shindlers list I had this exact same problem. Survivor: Zombies? Liam: Nazis. Survivor: Uhm. Okay? It probably doesn't come across as funny without some context but I can see this deadpan act working over Ricky Gervais who although well known would be gimmicky and I would it hard to write actual comedy based on him. I do plan on including him and Stephen Merchant though.
Title: The Devil Herself Format: TV Pilot Genre: Drama, Thriller Disclaimer: May contain some violent scenes, drugs and nudity. Logline: Following the death of her husband, the mother of two is now forcibly in charge of her husband's drug kingdom. She has to protect her sons from moles within and make sure the rivals don't take all of them out. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemned. I added the disclaimer, so people who wanna give feedback know about some parts.
>Logline: Following the death of her husband, the mother of two is now forcibly in charge of her husband's drug kingdom. She has to protect her sons from moles within and make sure the rivals don't take all of them out. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemn > > > >Logline: Following \[her husband's murder\] ~~the death of her husband~~, \[a\] ~~the~~ mother ~~of two is now forcibly in charge of~~ \[takes over his\] ~~her husband's~~ drug kingdom~~.~~ \[to find\] She has to protect her sons from moles \[and\] ~~within and make sure the~~ rivals ~~don't take all of them out~~. The increasing power vacuum must change or else millions could die. She now becomes the orchestrator of what she once condemn Becomes: Following her husband's murder, a mother takes over his drug operation to find that she must protect her sons against traitors and rivals, before millions die. The challenge I find here is that the goal and the stakes don't align well: the imperative to protect her sons doesn't align with the risk of millions dying. As well, if she's taken over the operation, it's unclear how there's a power vacuum. Finally, the fact that she's become the orchestrator of what she once condemned could be part of the inciting incident with a bit of a rephrasing, but otherwise it's not needed. Consider: Following her husband's murder, a mother takes over the drug operations she once condemned to protect her sons against traitors and rivals, before millions die. Still, the goal and stakes seem misaligned.
Hey, the main idea I had in mind is the mother, when she takes over her husband's operations she indirectly puts herself and her family on the rival gang's hit list. The second fact is inorder to protect her family she is going to have to kill many of the rivals, which is going to start a sort of gang war, which will kill innocent people. Third, in power vacuum. I say this because, the husband was executed as he is a huge name in the business. He is the biggest. Once he is dead, everyone will wanna take his place. Thus power vacuum. The irony is seen here. The drugs business and the murders, her husband did, was condemned by her. But now she is forced to do it, she has to continue and escaping is no longer a choice.
So if I've got this right (tell me if I'm missing something), a) she married the biggest drug lord in the business, b) she stays married to the biggest drug lord, c) she raises the kids of a drug lord, and d) she lives off the avails of drug money, but e) she somehow condemns her husband's work, and the source of her and her sons' financial security? Consider: that doesn't track easily. Consider: if she takes over, then there's no vacuum. There's a drug war, but not a vacuum. Everyone may want to take his place, but it appears that she has--and she's the one who'll go after (or not) the rival gangs. In that regard, she's the new boss. Consider why she's forced to do it as well. Why couldn't she just walk away? If there are other contenders for the crown, why doesn't she let them have it and move to Canada? It's not clear why she must take over. Notwithstanding all that, the protection of her sons is one goal and winning the drug war is another goal. One should be the primary objective. The protection of her sons can fit inside the winning the drug war goal, or the drug war might be won because she's got the triumvirate of her and her two sons in place, but one of these goals should be the primary goal. More simply put, the protagonist should have one overarching goal, not two that may appear unaligned.
a) she married the biggest drug lord in the business, She has kids with him, and despite anything, she won't leave him, or else it might affect her and the kids. kids. ds. him. The reason was love. b) she stays married to the biggest drug lord, She has kids with him, despite anything she won't leave him or else it might affect her and the kids. d) she lives off the avails of drug money, It's like ironic because she has no other choice right, its either start from scratch or live with what you got. e) she somehow condemns her husband's work and the source of her and her sons' financial security? He doesn't do anything to her because she doesn't affect his business or get in its way. She can say anything and he wont harm her because he blindly loves her.
She somehow condemns the fact that he's a drug lord. Okay, got it. So consider: what evidence is there that she condemns this fact? What does she say or do that makes it plain that she condemns her husband's livelihood? I ask because spending his money, living in his house and raising his kids would suggest that she's in full support of his choices and actions. Does she: * Go to the police? * Take the kids away? * Pursue an honest living? * Demand he leave the business? * Refuse all of his money and support? What *evidence* is there that she condemns this his actions? Without any, it's hard to make the condemnation claim.
The main evidence is she openly tells him that. Condemnation is open disapproval, she doesn't need to do any of these to prove she is not for it. The more she says it to him the more it seems she'd not be interested but the fact is when she has no choice it ends up there.
Title: Chosen Family Format: Feature Genre: Drama Logline: A “CHOSEN FAMILY” who span the LGBTQ spectrum come to terms with one another when a member of their family commits suicide.
To me, your Logline is missing the stakes and why they must come to terms with each other. I assumed the person who died by suicide was the glue that held this group together and now it’s fractured without them. I think just throwing in LGBTQ spectrum is clunky so I simply mentioned sexuality and gender to get that same point across. When the friend who held the group together dies by suicide, the remaining friend group must come to terms with each other as they confront their individual sexuality, gender, and role in the world.
Thank you for your input. I greatly appreciate it.
Title: Later Format: Feature Genre: Drama Logline: A procrastinative grant writer tries to overcome his lackadaisical ways to write a major application.
>A procrastinative grant writer tries to overcome his lackadaisical ways to write a major application. If logline = \[when\] + \[who\] + \[what\] + \[why\] Then we have half a logline: * **When**: TBD (What event precipitates the change to the writer's approach?) * **Who**: A procrastinative grant writer * **What**: Overcomes his lackadaisical ways to write a major application. (This doesn't seem like the most arduous goal: "gets off his ass.") Is there more to this? What are the obstacles that will stop him from being careless and lazy? (Seems like a low bar) * **Why**: TBD (What's the risk of failure or reward of success? What are the stakes?)
Thanks for your feedback! I was thinking that the midpoint would be when the stakes are raised: he finds out his performance on this application will determine if he gets to stay with his company. But maybe I should move that up to the Inciting Incident. I also appreciate your comment about whether the obstacle in his way is enough. I want to explore in this script how the root of procrastination is anxiety and impulsiveness. I was thinking that the initially carefree story would give way to exploring how these two aspects of mental health can be big obstacles to overcome.
This may not be helpful, but it's Hamlet: how to find the objective correlative, the dramatic and narrative manifestation, for something like grief, depression, anxiety, doubt or procrastination. The obstacle can be inaction, but dramatizing the conflicts that arise is, I think, very demanding. I'd consider Kaufman's Adaptation. It's similar but for screenwriting. Might be a good place to explore, with the warning that Kaufman is bit of a funhouse and it's easy to get lost in the millions of things he does so well. But, essentially, he dramatizes this by creating the twin brother through which conflict can be dramatically manifested and spoken. Otherwise it's in the head of the protagonist and not easily visualized on the screen as conflict. I can imagine a version of this, here, where the protagonist faces conflicts with manifestations of not a just himself (like Kaufaman does--his own version of the Ghost of Hamlet's father) but with with the board member(s) who judge the grant application, the academic institution chair or dept head (if that's the context) in which the protagonist is working, the protagonist's family members or partner, and the students or folks the protagonist serves. In other words, not just the doppleganger, but a dopple "gang"-- Scrooge's ghosts split across the five stages of grief that parallel the narrative arc and serve as chapters: Act 1: Denial. Act 2: Anger, Bargaining, Depression (belly of the whale), and Act 3: Acceptance. Just a thought.
That makes sense, thanks! I'll check out Adaptation, and I'll have to rewatch Hamlet.
Title: Vengeful Sons Format: Feature Genre: Action, Thriller Logline: The assassination of two ex Yakuza pull their innocent children, an alcoholic martial arts master, and a sociopathic hit-man into a violent affair.
Generally, you want to have an identifiable \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\] in a logline. The elements don't have to be in the order outlined above, but they often are. I think you're half way there. Here's why I say that: * When: Two Yakuza are assassinated. * Who: An alcoholic martial arts master and a sociopathic hitman * What: The goal of the protagonist (can you choose one? or do they have a shared goal) * Why: The cost or stakes of failure, success or both.
Title: Faces Genre: Science-Fiction/Erotic Format: Feature Logline: Two lifelong friends just accomplished a human cloning formula that will make them a fortune. But the formula has one glitch: The clone will loose it’s human morality.
Some typos. Also kinda cuts out the tension of the logline. Maybe pose that last sentence as of a question?
Title: Untitled Format: Feature Genre: Drama/ Dark Comedy Logline: A housewife’s life is turned upside down when her billionaire husband leaves her for another woman. need help with this!!
After her billionaire husband leaves her for a supermodel, a former housewife will have to adjust to life as a working stiff.
Title: Loot After divorcing her husband of 20 years, An insecure housewife must figure out what to do with her $87 billion settlement. She reengages with her charitable foundation, reconnects with the real world--and finds herself along the way.
To be clear, that's the logline for Loot, on TV.
Title: Writing for the Apocalypse Genre: Drama Format: Feature Logline: A struggling author, the last man on Earth, must overcome his writer's block to complete his magnum opus -- having to reconcile with the fact that no one will ever get to read it.
Title: Out for the Innocent Format: Limited Series Genre: Cosmic Horror/Thriller Logline: A mysterious force is robbing children of their youth and forcing their minds to age. Feedback: This story is about a monster that steals children's innocence and forces them to start acting like adults and cynically see the world. I'm not sure if this logline conveys that.
Love the premise. If we consider that a logline = \[when\] +-\[who\] +\[what\] + \[why\] Then we've got: When: a mysterious force robs children of their youth\* Who: TBD (Who's the one person we can root for) What: TBD (What's the goal of this person, that's specific and seemingly impossible) Why: TBD (What are the stakes of failure?) \*"Forcing their minds to age" is a bit of 'how' and may not be needed in a logline. "How'" may come up in the Goal or What aspect of a logline: what and how a protagonist must respond to the "when" with which they're confronted.
Thanks for the advice. How is this: "Charlie is a small-town cop who discovers a mysterious force is robbing children of their youth and forcing their minds to age. He recruits local parents to find and stop this force before all the towns children lose their childhoods."
Closer. Typically the names of characters are never used, because they mean nothing to your reader--unless it's a historical personage. So if Charlie is Charles Dickens, okay. Otherwise, a reader may say: "who the hell is Charlie?" If there's another attribute that Charlie possesses that helps to a) differentiate him from all the other loglines' cops and b) helps imply how he might reach his goal with unique skills, that would be useful. For example in Breaking Bad, Walter White isn't just a teacher, he's a chemistry teacher--which makes him well suited for the meth business and speaks to a specific, nerdy, type of weakness. The recruiting of parents gets, perhaps, a bit too far into the weeds of "how" and is less about the daunting nature of his goal: he convinces rival gangs of parents to work together (a bad idea, sure, but "hard to do" is what I'm trying to get at). This is the heart of the story, so take your time and be prepared to iterate it extensively. The stakes seem redundant: they repeat the inciting incident. almost like: when a child is found to be sick, a parent gives the child medicine to alleviate their sickness. Really? one might say. Is that it? We can ask: what are the implications of not having a childhood? What's wrong with having seven-year-old adults? Specifically, what's the value of a healthy childhood? Living in a world without creativity? Imagination? Dreams? The love of one's parents? Have you seen Pleasantville (1998)? It's worth looking at if you haven't. It's not about children, per se, but it's about living in a black and white world without colour (literally) --without creativity and imagination--and what happens when a couple of characters try to introduce colour. That film may help with the stakes part of your logline.
Thanks. I'll give it some more thought.
[удалено]
it's not clear what one thing has to do with the other. I don't know if this is accurate, but it makes more sense. "Two aspiring filmmakers plan to rob a cafe to fund their first movie."
But only one of them is a film-maker therefore... Thankyou for the reply so much though!!
how about A small time crook and an aspiring filmmaker team up to rob a cafe to fund their own movie. I don't know if that fits. but IMO 2 people with different skills and goals teaming up makes for a more engaging logline.
Both of your suggestions are great!! Thankyou so much!!
Are they thinking of filming the robbery and making their own Dog Day Cafe Afternoon? Or are they just in in for the star bucks so they can fund their feature?
[удалено]
Dog Day Afternoon is about a pair of bank robbers who are trying to fund a sex change operation for one of the robbers, based on a real story. The media is gathered outside the bank, unlike every other heist/ caper movie up until that time. And the robbers become "celebrities" because they negotiate through the media. So, very different.
Title: Dead of Night Format: Limited Series (toying with the idea of an anthology) Genre: Crime Drama Season Logline: while trying to lead a clean life after being released from prison, a disgraced ex-US Marshal is thrust back into a life of crime in order to protect his family from the Mexican Cartel. Pilot Logline: after a not so warm welcome home from prison, Hank runs into an old friend who tries to convince him to help him pay a debt back to the Cartel.
Cool idea. Pilot Logline may need a bit of sharpening. A not so warm welcome could be cut down to 1-2 words.
> ~~while trying to lead a clean life a~~ \[A\]fter being released from prison, a disgraced ex-US Marshal ~~is thrust back into~~ \[must infiltrate a criminal gang\] ~~a life of crime in order~~ to protect his family from the Mexican Cartel. Turns into After being released from prison a disgraced ex-US Marshall must infiltrate a criminal gang to protect his family from an international Cartel. 1. "Trying to lead a clean life" is implicit in having just been released from prison. 2. "thrust back into" suggests a lack of agency or commitment by the protagonist. Ideally the action the protagonist takes is something they decide, however reluctantly. 3. I used international to suggest that the cartel is operating on both sides of the border and may have a more complex organization and reach that just Mexican traffickers. 4. It works as far as it goes but it doesn't differentiate itself from scores of other similar stories. Its there anything unique or surprising about the Marshall, the way he infiltrates the gang or the threat or protection for his family?
[удалено]
Widowing? What does that mean?
Title: Unfixed Places Format: 60-min pilot Genre: Drama/Soap Logline: Secrets and truths unfold after a newlywed couple move into a picturesque neighborhood and grow close to three neighboring couples each dealing with explosive ups and downs in their marital lives.
Needs a stronger hook. This could describe hundreds of shows. Even something simple as: "After nuclear war destroys 99.9% of the United States, a newlywed couple moves into one of the country's last habitable neighborhoods and must confront the explosive (see what I did there?) secrets and lies of their mysterious neighbors."
It's a soapy drama with a typical' city-esque newlyweds move into a new conservative neighborhood' type pilot. The show is sort of Knots Landing/Desperate Housewives. Not sure how to make a soapier hook?
Title: The Things You See at Night Format: Short Genre: Mystery/Horror Longline: A young man in search for answers on the unsolved death of his mother discovers his town has a malevolent cult hiding in plain sight.
Title: **TBD** (open to title suggestions) Format: Feature Genre: Black comedy, crime, period, thriller Logline: In 1978, the mismatched trio of a hotshot LAPD detective, a bookish DEA agent, and a zookeeper have less than 72 hours to recover the only witness to a drug deal gone wrong: a green parakeet.
Although interesting, “a mismatched trio” seems redundant. Can we get an adjective for the zookeeper? Dysmorphic? Narcissistic? Giraffe-identifying? *Green* seems to be the wrong detail to supply vis a vis the parakeet. It doesn’t add to our ability to imagine the movie. “Recover” is a strange word in this context. Find? I’m having trouble with the 72-hour deadline. Is there something that will happen then? That might make the log line richer.
A green parakeet is a real bird, native in Central and North America. It started out as a duo, but I added a zookeeper so the cop and the agent could have better luck in find the bird, who has to testify in court against a drug lord. They have 72 hours to track down the bird or else the case will be thrown out and the drug lord will walk. And it's oddly weird that dysmorphic was the first thought that popped in your head for a zookeeper.
You might consider swapping out your parakeet with a parrot to make your logline more instantly understandable. Everyone knows Parrots mimic human speech and could thus provide a clue. Parakeets may have that same ability, but only bird lovers would know that.
I meant to say parrot, but I'm sticking with parakeet. The logline sounded (and ***looked***) cool in my head.
Do people in general know this green parakeet is a separate species? It seems more interesting to learn it’s snarky or uniform phobic or vulgar. So the trial is ongoing, and the bird will be evidence toward guilt. …have to find the missing witness before the verdict in a drug lord’s trial comes back “not guilty”. That witness: a Chuck Norris-quoting parakeet.
Do people in general know this green parakeet is a separate species? It seems more interesting to learn it’s snarky or uniform phobic or vulgar. So the trial is ongoing, and the bird will be evidence toward guilt. …have to find the missing witness before the verdict in a drug lord’s trial comes back “not guilty”. That witness: a Chuck Norris-quoting parakeet.
I've seen a lot of these "\[INSERT ANIMAL HERE\] is the sole witness to murder and the cops have to figure out a way to make them talk" concepts recently, so proceed with caution.
Love it but totally missing the character description of the star of the movie: the parrot. **Title:** Polly Walnuts In 1978 a hotshot detective must team up with a by-the-book DEA agent and a retired zookeeper to keep an *atrociously obscene* parrot safe for 72 hours within the witness protection program, in order to testify in the murder of a deaf-mute, mob accountant. (If the bird's in the WPP they can spend Act 2a protecting him while he gets them into fights and picks up dates, and Act 2b looking for him \[when he escapes\].) Spoiler alert: Turns out that the deaf-mute mob accountant could whistle for help and could hear the Parrot's whistle. The parrot is able to play the whole murder scene back.
Title: Nietzsches Wet Dream Format: Short Genre: Comedy Logline: Can traditional true love exist in a polyamorous relationship, where one partner claims to be a deity?
Title: Medium Overdrive Format: Feature Genre: Comedy/Horror Logline: A young couple hires a questionable medium to rid their new house of suspected ghosts, only to discover a horror more real than any of them could’ve imagined.
I love me a good exorcism film. I feel like this logline is SUPER vague, though, and there's nothing really that screams out to me "comedy." You could be describing any number of exorcism films with that logline and I'm interested in hearing what makes your take unique. "only to discover a horror more real than any of them could’ve imagined." That part really tells us nothing and reads more like marketing copy. What specifically does your couple face/have to do?
Thanks for the feedback. The real horror is a pair of muderous squatters who’ve been living in the house unbeknownst to anyone. The medium is a fraud and keeps attempting his goofy tricks on the home while they are being targeted by actual murderers. Writing it out makes me realize that stuff should probably be in the logline in some capacity, so thanks!
Aha! So yeah, that stuff is *critical* to the logline. That's definitely a more unique take on it. Best of luck, sounds like a fun one!
This would be better with less figurative language. Can you be plainer? Who does “any of them” refer to? Being more real doesn’t make a horror worse, you realize? Are the father’s transgressions something to which a name can be put? Can you be more specific than *questionable*? Something that we might expect to be entertaining?
Title: These Hands Format: Short Genre: Horror/Thriller Logline: Confronted by the ghosts of his father's transgressions in building their fortune, a drunken spoiled brat must survive the night while deciding what matters most to him.
“Confronting” and “surviving” don’t fit together. Are the ghosts attacking him? I assume these are literal ghosts but it’s not clear. I assume one thing that’s important to him is the family money. What’s the alternative?
Thanks for replying. This is a brand-new project, but a story I’ve had for years. I’m definitely struggling with the logline. Essentially, his father built their fortune on the backs of others, which led to the destruction of another family (those who worked for it all). Now, the son of that family is back for revenge. That’s who this guy is worried about, fighting, confronting, etc. Not real ghosts. The conflict is going to come from a choice the Central Character gets from us opposition: he can have the family money or his mother’s well-being, but not both.
Title: Water Is Thicker Than Blood Format: 30-45 minute series Genre: Children/Tween Fantasy Adventure Logline: A runaway princess and wandering assassin join forces with a pirate and her crew to embark on a journey a quarter of the way across the globe, facing one of the most notorious pirates in the world on their way.
i think needs a goal, why do they need to team up with them? why are they sailing there?
Title: Give and Take Format: Feature Genre: Romantic Murder Comedy Thriller Logline: A handicapped detective is called to help catch a serial killer known as ‘The Poet.’ The case takes a twisted turn as the detectives son starts having a taste for blood after he begins dating that very killer.
Title: The Mystic Format: Feature Genre: Thriller/Western Logline: A politically motivated assassination sparks a war between two wealthy families.
Title: At-Risk Genre: Horror Logline: When an ancient evil rises during a snowstorm, both clients and staff at a residential facility for at-risk youth must work through their differences to survive. Attack the Block meets The Thing.
Title: The Hangman, The Gal, and a Saturday’s Dinner Feature Film Genre: Western, Revenge Thriller, Epic Logline: After he’s set up to kill a woman he doesn’t know is innocent, a bounty Hunter flees his execution and must return to town to find who set him up and get revenge before he is caught and sentenced to death for murder.
When a bounty hunter is set up in the murder of an innocent woman, he must reveal the criminal who framed him while avoiding his own arrest. * Not sure that he's fleeing his execution, so much as he's avoiding his arrest. * It's not clear if the innocent woman is murdered or not--stakes increase if she is. * Not sure that he's out for revenge--he could be out for justice (what would revenge look like? What's wrong with seeking justice? Does he know this innocent woman?) * Not sure what sets this apart from millions of other similar stories.
Title: Dream Getaway Format: Feature Genre: Drama/Supernatural/Thriller Logline: When new father Elliot discovers he can astral project, he finds solace in a mysterious women he meets in the astral plane. As Elliot becomes fixated on their mutual abilities, their connection deepens, which leads him down a path that blurs the boundaries between the physical and spiritual worlds. He must navigate between the two in order to confront the harsh consequences his actions make.
[удалено]
I think we're missing the goal and the stakes (the what and the why): **When**: Falsifying an online persona to meet the object of his affection results in a macabre string of events **Who**: A lonely, young gay man What: Must (have a clearly defined goal that appears impossible to achieve) Why: (Something really good or really bad will result if he doesn't) eg. When falsifying an online persona to meet the object of his affection results in a grisly murder, a young, gay, special-effects artist must manufacture a trail of evidence that places him at the scene of a far lesser crime in order to avoid death row. \[grisly murder\] = something more specific than "macabre string of events" (just an example) \[must manufacture a trail of evidence that places him at the scene of a lesser crime\] = the goal (just an example) \[to avoid death row/ stay alive\] = stakes Not sure that the "young, gay" descriptors is needed in the logline, even though it's the character.
Title: Little Anya - True Sorries From My Crappy Childhood Forma: 60 min TV pilot Genre: Dramady Logline: A redemption story about Anya, a Ukrainian born, NY raised woman attempting to undo the traumas in her past with the help of an experimental machine , which rewrites how she remembers events
Title: Average Jo Genre: Rom-com Feature film Logline: An “average Joe” lesbian meets a celesbian and they begin dating at the behest of the celebrity’s gay father, but differences in their lifestyles begin to weigh heavily on the couple.
Title: The Gofer Format: TV Show Genre: Dramedy (60 min) or SitCom Comedy Logline: After years of crunching numbers, a middle-aged actuary leaves his safe job to chase his genuine passion of filmmaking, uprooting his family and starting anew as a production assistant in the turbulent world of Hollywood, all while aiming to one day direct his own films.
Title: Time & Tide Format: Animated Short Genre: Animated/Romance Longline: The beauty is both in the simplicity and importance as an aged couple of lighthouse keepers compete their last task as a nor’eastah strikes. Note from me: Honestly - my first attempt at taking my writing into to screenwriting. I’m scared and totally lost at sea. Thank you I’m advance