Set against the Sierra Nevada foothills of the Gold Rush era where newly dominant white settlers rule, a young Mexican woman discovers she comes from a line of rebels led by folk-hero outlaw Joaquin Murieta. Nurtured by a cross-dressing Chinese madam and fueled by the unfair murder of her family, she recruits a wild bunch of female warriors to plot one of the most audacious rebellions the new state of California has ever seen.

Question 1:? Have the recruits likewise suffered the loss of family members??? IOW: what's their motivation?? What drives them to violence, to such extreme measures?? What is their personal stake??

The various iterations of "Robin Hood" come to mind.? Robin is able to rally the peasants to fight the barons (personified by the nefarious sheriff of Nottingham) because they have suffered injustices like he has.? They aren't going to join him just because he can make a fiery speech, or because he's handsome and radiates personal magnetism.? They are only going to risk their lives because they have skin in the game.?

Question 2: "begins the most audacious rebellion..."? Well, other than avenging the murder of her family, what does that specifically entail?? Lead a retrocession movement to return California to Mexico?? Fight for independence from both the U.S. and Mexico?? Become bandidas stealing gold from the prospectors?

I can visualize a number of dramatic possibilities here -- and that's good.? A logline is working when it fires up the imagination of readers.? But I suggest the story hook needs to be further baited with a little more specific detail.

Shorter, better.? But...

Her objective goal entails a shotgun approach rather than a rifle.? That is, the logline gives the impression she is going to fire off her outrage aimlessly in all directions, like buckshot.? And at what for dramatic purposes is an abstraction -- racist brutality.? Instead of aiming bullets at the primary target of real people, who are racist, brutal and greedy.? Bullets aimed specifically at the prospectors who murdered her family.

It's more effective to define an m.o. and objective goal in terms of rifle bullets rather than buckshot.?? And historically speaking, there is no way a buckshot approach could get rid of all the greedy prospectors.? That's not believable.? There was just too many of them.

But it is believable that she can take down the murderers of her family and organize women to take down the murderers of their loved ones.

I'm saying this assuming the character is fictional.? However, if the story is based upon a real historical character, a Mexican woman who organized a "Wild Bunch" of other Mexican women to terrorize the gringo prospectors, well in that case, the logline should say so.? Because truth is stranger than fiction.-- and easier to believe, easier to sell.

fwiw

I was born and grew up in the shadow of Sierra Nevada mountains.? I have no problem with the credibility of the setting.

But at 74 words, it's much too long to work as a logline.? A logline needs to be a succinct summary of the plot.? By succinct, I mean it should not exceed 40 words in length.

And, per Richiev, it buries two important story elements.

First of all, it buries the inciting incident, the event that kicks of the plot.? Which I'm guessing is her family's murder.? The llogline should lead off with that event, not bury it in the middle.

Second, it buries the story hook, the most interesting aspect of the story.? Which is that she recruits a women's version of the "Wild Bunch".? That should be positioned right after the inciting incident, not buried at the end.

To do what exactly?? What is her specific objective goal?? I can guess, but I shouldn't have to.? The logline needs to clearly inform me what she intends to do with her? "Wild Bunch".