After gaining superpowers, a group of clumsy and incompetent young adults set out to become the world?s first supervillains, but must first gain control over their city from the corrupt, but powerful superheroes who protect it.

My first critique, so take it with a grain of salt.

Sounds great on the surface but who am I meant to care about in this story?

The Supervillains? (Antiheros)

Isn't a hero's value measured in the might and/or cunning of his opponent.

If the Superheros don't care what happens to their city, they sound like weak adversaries, standing by while bad things happen.

And I'd like to hear what the "Theme" is, and what the Supervillains risk losing at "All is lost".

Interesting idea, but not sure I can follow the story from your logline. Seems a bit confusing to have two sets of bad guys as it were....all be it one set not as bad as the other.

>>The corrupt heroes are not villains, they just aren?t good people

That may not work in the super hero genre. The super hero genre, by definition is about extreme character types. Characters are drawn in stark black and white -- there are rarely shades of grey, at least not with the principal characters, certainly not the antagonist.

It takes a great antagonist to make a protagonist. Darth Vader made Luke Skywalker the hero he becomes and made 100's of millions of dollars in ticket sales -- and toys. (Dittoo Princess Leia, and Hans Solo and Yoda, et al.)

You're writing a spec script for a series, right? What is there about the relationship between the good guys and the bad guys that is going to hook people's interest, make them come back every week for the next episode. Nobody I know tuned into "Breaking Bad" episode after episode because Walter White was opposed by tepid, "corrupt but not evil" dudes. We all tuned in because Walter was up against utterly ruthless, and in the case of Gustavo Fring, intelligent and cunning antagonists.

If the antagonists in your story are moral mediocrities, where's the dramatic conflict, the tension? Where's the suspense to hook your audience's interest, make them tune in next week.. and the week...

The corrupt heroes are not villains, they just aren't good people. What i mean is that they are not protecting the city out of the goodness of their heart, but because they are getting paid to do it and would gladly stand by and watch the city burn if there's nothing in it for them. They have not done anything evil to anyone ever and have only done good for the city, but, atleast in my mind, just because a person does good does not make them a good person. Their morality can be swayed.
In this world, the heroes fight petty criminals and gangs, stop meteors and such, not other super powered beings, hence the group would have been the first SUPER villains.

Right on, dpg...

This sort of sounds like "Chronicle" with a wicked twist that doesn't make logical sense - it seems REDUNDANT considering that, "the clumsy and incompetent young adults" setting out to "become the world's 'first' super[-]villains" battle superheroes that are seemingly already "villains" - e.g., "corrupt"(?)

Another thing is the problem with "superhero" concepts: They're... sort of played out and perhaps even dominated by Marvel, et. al.

Let me see if I can unpack the concept. Stripped of superfluous words, the concept seems to boil down to:

After gaining superpowers, a group of clumsy young adults set out to become supervillians by seizing control of the city from the corrupt superheroes who protect it. (27 words)

I see 2 major problems with this logline (and the original). First of all, how can the young adults become the world's "first supervillians" when in the universe of the story the putative "superheroes" are corrupt-- in effect, they are already supervillains?

Well, the ready explanation seems to be that that is the end of Act 2 Big Reveal; the main characters discover that the superheroes are corrupt, are actually the world's first supervillains that the main characters aspire to be.

But a logline shouldn't give away the Big Reveal. And since the story is, I presume, told (primarily)from the POV of the wannabe supervillains, it's sufficient to frame the logline likewise. The objective goal of young adults is to be supervillains by overthrowing the superheroes.

The other problem I see is that the logline requires an ensemble cast of two sets of superstars-- supervillains and superheroes. That makes the script harder to sell because it raises production costs; the story requires multiple major roles.

And it makes it harder to sell the script because it offends egos; major talent does not like to share top billing; they are not motivated to attach themselves to a script where they are only one among several equals.

But aren't there ensemble casts featuring major talent for a lot of super hero movies? Yes, and as far as I know, all of them come pre-tested, pre-sold in the graphic novel market. Has your collection of wannabe supervillains and putative superheroes been tested and proven to be money making winners in the market of graphic novels?

IMHO, it would be better marketing to pare the concept down to one wannabe super villain against one putative super hero. So here's my repacking of the concept:

After gaining superpowers, a klutzy young man (or woman) sets out to become a supervillain by overthrowing the super hero who protects the city. (24 words)

fwiw

I agree with Mr Griffiths on all counts - too wordy, but the concept rocks!

Consider: "After gaining superpowers, a group of awkward teens set out to become the world?s first supervillains - by taking control of their city from corrupt superheroes."

Would be super villains have to defeat super heroes that are running a protection racket, love the concept.

It is really wordy, drop the detail and save it for the story. Clumsy and Incompetent and similar and are a bit granular.