|
|
Post by jsb2k10 on Nov 5, 2010 12:44:33 GMT -5
A political activist has planted landmines thoughout Washington D.C. in protest of U.S. landmine policies. A team of Violent Crimes investigators take him on, turning Washington into a war zone.
Comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by mohican007 on Nov 5, 2010 13:50:41 GMT -5
A political activist has planted landmines thoughout Washington D.C. in protest of U.S. landmine policies. A team of Violent Crimes investigators take him on, turning Washington into a war zone. Comments? Hey, starts off okay, but closing part is excellent. I would watch this movie. Sounds like this would be an amazing script. What stage are you at on this script? IMO , a winner, also, would make an awesome video game. |
|
atb
New Member
Posts: 46
|
Post by atb on Nov 5, 2010 14:10:28 GMT -5
Sounds interesting. I agree that the ending is what pulls you in.
But what stick out to me is: Why would someone who doesn't agree with U.S. landmine policies want to use landmines to change the policy?
... I'm assuming he disagrees with using landmines or something. So if that's the case, then it seems unlikely that he would potentially kill people (innocent people, at that) with landmines.
Get what I mean? Maybe something else needs to be added to explain this or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by jsb2k10 on Nov 5, 2010 15:10:49 GMT -5
Thanks for the quick responses. The script has gone through a couple re-writes and I think it is ready to go out. To answer a question, the activist is not trying to kill innocents and the script reflects that. He is targeting politicians (everybody's favorite new villian) so they understand what its like to have landmines littering their otherwise civil community.
|
|
|
|
Post by rwlear on Nov 5, 2010 15:34:54 GMT -5
The antagonist of course lost his wife and kids to a US landmine in Iraq. Perhaps the land mined road that was not meant to be targeted. Perhaps the antagonist is an ex-Iraq army Demolitions expert who was trying to get his family out of Iraq as he opposed Saddam's regime and once thought the US were the good guys?? If I was writing the script I would have him seemingly randomly targeting Washington, but there is actually method behind his madness. The head of the Washington demolitions squad is an ex-Iraq vet who was unknowingly responsible for the deployment of those landmines that killed his family. It will gradually dawn on him that it is a political and personal vendetta and the final target is his own wife and kids. This would make for an interesting paradox as it would blur the lines between the two main characters. Sounds interesting. I agree that the ending is what pulls you in. But what stick out to me is: Why would someone who doesn't agree with U.S. landmine policies want to use landmines to change the policy? ... I'm assuming he disagrees with using landmines or something. So if that's the case, then it seems unlikely that he would potentially kill people (innocent people, at that) with landmines. Get what I mean? Maybe something else needs to be added to explain this or something. |
|
|
|
Post by rwlear on Nov 5, 2010 15:42:36 GMT -5
You need to make this more personal to work, see my other comment. I knew an ex-Iraq demolitions vet. He like others used to tag their mines. Place their own brand on them, a symbol, like ww11 planes. I would have the antag mimic the protags tag. So that when he recovers one that is intact he is shocked to realize that this a personal attack as well as a political statement. If you want any more ideas you will have to give me a co-writer credit  Thanks for the quick responses. The script has gone through a couple re-writes and I think it is ready to go out. To answer a question, the activist is not trying to kill innocents and the script reflects that. He is targeting politicians (everybody's favorite new villian) so they understand what its like to have landmines littering their otherwise civil community. |
|
|
|
Post by jsb2k10 on Nov 5, 2010 16:22:34 GMT -5
I appreciate the responses. Rwlear, those are some good plotlines but I'm going to keep what I have. Just wanted some feedback on the logline before wrapping it into a query. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by rwlear on Nov 5, 2010 16:44:38 GMT -5
No problem. I think prod company readers will point out the same issues.
|
|
joea
Junior Member
Posts: 76
|
Post by joea on Nov 13, 2010 11:06:57 GMT -5
A political activist has planted landmines thoughout Washington D.C. in protest of U.S. landmine policies. A team of Violent Crimes investigators take him on, turning Washington into a war zone. Comments? The logline is sort of clunky, in my opinion. It really doesn't need to be two sentences. How about: A team of violent crimes investigators tracks a radical political activist who's littered Washington D.C. with landmines, turning it into a war zone. This logline also has the advantage of giving us the impression that the lead characters are the violent crimes investigators, which I assume to be the case. Perhaps you've focused on the political activist, but I sort of doubt that. Hope this helps. Joe |
|
|
|
Post by dmedley on Nov 16, 2010 1:56:18 GMT -5
I think it's excellent. It's concise, unambiguous, and you can almost see the trailer. In my humble opinion, I wouldn't change a thing.
It certainly makes me want to read the script.
Regards.
|
|
|
|
Post by jsb2k10 on Nov 16, 2010 16:48:46 GMT -5
I appreciate the responses. Does anyone have any followup opinion regarding the use of two sentences as clunky as Joea suggested? My intent was to describe the setup temporally which, of course, has the crime preceding involvement by the police.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianhaas on Nov 18, 2010 0:51:46 GMT -5
From what I've read from actual screenwriters and on these types of boards, one sentence is definitely preferred. Though I'm not a fan of formulas, the general formula is something like this: Logline = Protagonist + main goal + main problem/villain + stakes. So you'll see the pros have something like, Title: Tough Cookie "A girl scout with brass balls and terminal hair cancer must defeat a ruthless group of Swedish terrorists who possess the only vial containing a cure for her rare condition." It's a ridiculous example, but you kind of get the point. To that end, I think joea's logline fits quite nicely in that mold, if that's what your story is about. If your story's protag is the crazy mine-layer, you're going to have some trouble making him into a viable "hero" a la Michael Douglas in "Falling Down." It's not impossible, but certainly a tougher story decision than I'd be willing to tackle at this point in my writing career. Whether you like the logline formula or not, I think the takeaway is that you should probably be able to simply state your protagonist's struggle (i.e. the whole movie) in a single sentence. EDIT: Just remembered Scriptshadow has a logline contest he does. Some great examples here: scriptshadow.blogspot.com/2009/11/top-100-loglines-for-scriptshadow.htmlMost of them are single liners. |
|
|
|
Post by jsb2k10 on Nov 19, 2010 9:16:11 GMT -5
Good info, many thanks. I will be working on this logline.
|
|
joea
Junior Member
Posts: 76
|
Post by joea on Nov 24, 2010 0:01:10 GMT -5
Title: Tough Cookie "A girl scout with brass balls and terminal hair cancer must defeat a ruthless group of Swedish terrorists who possess the only vial containing a cure for her rare condition." Hahaha. I would definitely watch that movie. |
|
|
|
Post by brianhaas on Nov 29, 2010 1:29:04 GMT -5
Title: Tough Cookie "A girl scout with brass balls and terminal hair cancer must defeat a ruthless group of Swedish terrorists who possess the only vial containing a cure for her rare condition." Hahaha. I would definitely watch that movie. LOL, thanks. I may have to actually write that one. |
|
