When terrorists kidnap his family, a self-centered pilot is blackmailed into hijacking a plane. But when the flight is delayed and the FBI nab him, he cuts a deal to save the lives of everyone on board by sabotaging the hijacking – at the cost of his family's lives.

Yeah, kind of convoluted. And who is the antagonist, the master mind, the alpha terrorist of the whole collective terrorist conspiracy?

You've seemed to have trapped the pilot squarely between the horns of an authentic dilemma, between two 2 sets of stakeholders in the outcome of the his choices, the family and the passengers, between 2 equally undesirable outcomes. Dilemma in drama is always a good thing, and it's the aspect of the story that most intrigues me.

You mentioned 2 options: save the passengers (and himself) or save his family (and himself). What about a third option: he saves both the passengers and family -- by sacrificing himself? He wants to save both groups of stakeholders and himself (objective goal) -- but he finally realizes that he can only save 2 out of 3. He must rise above his character flaw (subjective need) and sacrifice himself for the others.

The "nabbed" issue: my protagonist is one of dozens of hijackers carrying out a massive series of attacks; he's been targeted because he's a pilot, but there are heaps of other planes being hijacked. The FBI don't know the flight numbers of all the targeted flights, so they still need the protag to carry out the hijacking; which would be the signal for the other hijackers on other planes to begin their missions. Thus; the FBI catch him at the midpoint and cut him a deal - if he switches sides and helps them out by bringing down the other hijackers on his plane AFTER triggering the coordinated attacks, they've assured him that they'll get his family back.

Even as I write it, I can feel it being too convoluted. Any suggestions? I guess that means that he doesn't have to sacrifice his family at the end, though - because switching sides doesn't then mean giving up his family?

Regarding the flaw; I hear what you're saying. It's something I'm struggling with. Do you really think it's succumbing to a character flaw for a self-centered hero to save thousands of other peoples' lives (even at the cost of his family)? I suppose the other option is to have his flaw being his overbearing nature towards his household, or else that he takes his family for granted? (What I was hoping to convey through his self centered nature). Very open to suggestions on this.

Cheers.

I'm confused. How can he sabotage the hijacking if the FBI has already "nabbed" him so he can't carry out the hijacking?

Also, he succumbs to his character flaw rather than rises above it. Hmmm.

Actually, if you could somehow keep these details in BUT get it under 30 words, you'll have your logline.

It's not like you'd put all that on the poster for the movie.

Yeah - specifically the midpoint, when the character's goal changes (first half = hijack the plane, second half = prevent the hijacking). I'm OK with it; I'm using the logline to test whether the story works, not to sell the script.

So with that knowledge - reckon it's got legs?

You just blew a major moment in your film.