Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
While investigating the abduction of a child in a remote community of the Appalachian Mountains, a FBI Agent makes the shocking discovery that he is linked to a disappearance there decades earlier.
senditon:>>>my feeling is that a logline should hook a reader?s interest by whatever means necessary.Which is to say, a logline should feature a must-read story hook. ?And I completely agree. ?Indeed, IMHO, for ?wannabes trying to break into business, the most important element in their scrRead more
senditon:
>>>my feeling is that a logline should hook a reader?s interest by whatever means necessary.
Which is to say, a logline should feature a must-read story hook. ?And I completely agree. ?Indeed, IMHO, for ?wannabes trying to break into business, the most important element in their script, hence, their logline, is a hook. ?A GREAT, irresistible hook.
So the question is: does “makes the shocking discovery that he is linked to a disappearance there decades earlier” constitute a strong story hook? ?Well, my personal, completely biased initial response was: ?not so much.
Every murder mystery ?has — or should have– ?at least one, plot-pivoting ?”shocking discovery”. ?It’s a standard operating feature of a mystery. So the fact that your story has a “shocking discovery” is not, uh, shocking. ?And since you shouldn’t reveal the Big Reveal in a logline, ?what’s the point in even suggesting there is one?
On the other hand, ?your revision does a better job of engaging my interest.
But don’t?these 2 versions lay out the same dramatic ?problem? ?Well, yes, but how you frame the plot is different. ?And I don’t think that’s a minor distinction.
Why do I favor the 2nd one over the 1st? ?Because the way I read the 2nd version is that your script will quickly set up the mystery, tease me in the right way with some intriguing clues. ?The central mystery is booted up in the 1st Act.
IOW: the 1st Act has a strong hook designed to ?grab an audience’s attention, make them want to know what happens next.
Whereas my reading of the 1st version is that it promises no particular hook in the 1st Act to grab and hold ?my attention. ?It ?offers a hook — eventually, maybe 50 ?or 60 minutes in, if the audience will only be patient and persevere. ?But in an age of multitasking, of so many alternatives, so many diversions, that’s an unrealistic expectation. ?You gotta hook the audience early, in the 1st Act.
So my take away is that ideally a logline should 1] have a strong hook; ?and?2] the hook should be planted in the 1st Act. ?Which,I think your 2nd version does on both counts.
And on the basis of that 2nd version, I give your story my thumbs up.
fwiw
See lessA young party girl finds herself lost in the woods and is confronted by a hoody who wants to frighten her with stories of the Suicide Forest.
The logline sets up a situation for a plot, but fails to follow through with presenting a plot. ' Who is protagonist, the party girl or the hoody? ?And what is the protagonist's objective goal? ?What's the obstacle and/or antagonist who stands in the way of that goal? And what's at stake?
The logline sets up a situation for a plot, but fails to follow through with presenting a plot.
See less‘
Who is protagonist, the party girl or the hoody? ?And what is the protagonist’s objective goal? ?What’s the obstacle and/or antagonist who stands in the way of that goal? And what’s at stake?
An Amature Drug-dealer decides to sell drugs by Dark Web, But he realizes it is not like he thought.
Well, I can't disagree with there being a stigma against drug dealers and that it won't be the easiest sell. Even though there are a number of fictional, and non-fictional characters in films, television, and books who deal drugs yet are very popular. Just saying that all drug dealers are bad peopleRead more
Well, I can’t disagree with there being a stigma against drug dealers and that it won’t be the easiest sell. Even though there are a number of fictional, and non-fictional characters in films, television, and books who deal drugs yet are very popular.
Just saying that all drug dealers are bad people is simplifying people to one trait. No one is just one thing, and they shouldn’t be defined by one unsavory thing. They’re human beings, with good and bad. They just made a bad decision.
I know people who have dealt and used drugs. They were high school kids. Are they terrible people? What about pharmacists, they technically deal drugs, are they terrible people? ?People abuse prescription drugs just like illegal ones.
There are multiple loglines featuring other types of criminals, including assassins and other people who have no qualms about killing. I haven’t seen you react like this to any of those concepts. Are people who are (exclusively) drug dealers really worse than murderers? High school kids?
I’m not saying they don’t need a goal that an audience can’t cheer on. I don’t know what experiences you’ve had that have shaped your opinion on this, but dealing drugs is hardly the worst thing in the world, and the people who deal them are people, too.
See less