In 2097, Islamic State?s genius operative befriends and covertly recruits the CIA?s foremost agent and develops a weapon like nothing in history or fiction.

thanks for that detail, that's really helpful - much appreciated

I'd echo both DPG and nicholasandrewhalls -- the pov is from the IS operative, which paints him as the hero as opposed to the antagonist -- but that seems odd for a couple of reasons: 1. He's an IS Operative... currently the western worlds arch enemy... it's a hard pill to swallow (unless they're your intended audience..???). 2. It's set 83 years in the future... that's a long time for IS to still be kickin round; it also sets the film up as SCI-FI, which is really the cousin to the ACTION genre, and action films don't typically have the bad guy as the lead... defines it as original, but not necessarily successful -- imo anyway.

If, on the other hand, the CIA guy is your hero, then I think you should begin the logline with him -- it's a subtle but dramatic difference that places your hero upfront, and we get the logline/ story from his pov... start with him, and tell us what he has to do to get out of his dilemma with IS. I get intrigued by loglines when I can see WHAT it is the hero has to do... my desire to see or read a film is driven by wanting to know HOW the hero will pull it off...

Best of luck with it.

It raises more confusion than curiosity in my mind.

A "weapon like none other in history or fiction" strikes me as hyperbolic. Its novelty is not the point for the purpose of the plot; rather, what matters dramatically is the threat it poses.

Also, the central focus of the plot (hence the logline) should be the human element, the double agents, not the weapon. Ultimately, stories are about people, not props.