4 reviews
Agreed with all the above notes.
I'll add that most good who dun it stories give the detective a personal stake in solving the crime. In this case, he or she is a detective and according to the current version of the logline, this is just another day on the job. What is it about this particular case that makes it more interesting than just any other case he or she had to solve?
I have no problem with why the detective must investigate the death.? That's his job, to investigate any case that lands on his desk.
I do have an issue with the character flaw/subjective issue: the girl's is defined specifically, the detective's is defined generally.? "Troubled" could refer to any number of personal problems, a failed marriage, gambling debts, a drinking problem, failing health.? Well, why is he "troubled".? I suggest that in the logline, a specific description of whatever subjective issue afflicts the protagonist takes precedence over a specific description of whatever afflicts a secondary character.
In fact, since you tossed the bipolar disorder into the pot of the plot, I am inclined to think it would be more interesting if the detective were bipolar.? That it might be more interesting if the girl is seemingly normal in every way --? that would enhance the mystery.? How could such a normal person get caught up in such an abnormal situation?
>>>dig deep into the secrets of a small town
Digging up skeletons, resurrecting ghosts from the past is a standard feature of the mystery genre.? That is what viewers expect to happen.? So it goes without having to say so in a logline.
fwiw
I think variable hit the nail on the head.
The inciting incident should happen to the lead character.
In your story, the inciting incident happens to someone else.
-------------------------------------------------------
"When a desperate?bipolar girl pleads for his help to discover?who murdered her mother, a small town detective's investigation?leads him into the depths of a dark paranormal mystery."