THE BLACK LIST 2014 - Logline Beat Down

[Pitchpatch]

With just a half-dozen weeks remaining until Black List 2015, I present to you my thoughts on the BL2014 loglines.

First thought: there's a lot of them.  I have appraised, poked, and prodded around half so far.  Therefore, this year I'll post them individually to this topic with a gush of loglines up front followed by a trickle at the back end.

Yeah.  Try to not think about diarrhea.  You can't.  But you must.  Because we're here to focus on those supremely important 25-40 words out of the many thousands you'll type telling your story.

Imagine, if you will -- DING! -- you step from your hotel elevator having arriving at, oh let's say, Floor 13.  Before you a long, sparsely lit corridor stretches away into darkness.

You see other hallways intersecting this one at regular intervals.  Punctuating these hallways are room doors.  Too many doors to count.  There are agents and producers roaming these hallways like white blood cells through a pulsing artery: vigilant, restless, questing.  These busy workers hurry from door to door, pausing only to inspect each nameplate.  Most of the time an agent will shake their head in disappointment before hastening to the next door. Once in a while an agent will judge a nameplate satisfactory.  That agent will smile with relief, straighten their back, neaten their appearance.  Even then, with a hand firmly gripping the doorknob, the agent will hesitate for a moment before turning it, as if knowing this decision to enter will come at a price.  The moment passes, the agent puts on an irresistibly charming smile, and in they go.  The door closes.  Perhaps in a while some other agent will arrive at this same door, find the nameplate agreeable, try the doorknob... and, finding it locked, move on.  Always moving on.

Yes, of course they are: those nameplates are loglines.  Your logline controls who stops at your door, who turns the knob, who greets you with a warm smile and a firm handshake.

Polish your nameplate.  Before or after your script gets written, you'd better polish your nameplate.

This year my arbitrary, subjective, scandalous and frivolous 4-star rating system is this: “nope,” “hmmm,” “good,” and “aces”.  I'm rating the logline only -- not the writer, not the script, not story potential.  It's all about logline execution.  Does it zing (Google) or does it bing (Microsoft)?

Especially note that when I riff on a logline I'm probably straying far from the author's original story idea.  Doing a plain word polish on a logline is the business end.  Playing with logline story elements is the fun part.

Respect as always to these hard-working authors striving to entertain the world and make a living doing it, and congratulations to every one of you for making the 2014 Black List.  Though I make fun of some of these loglines, folks, remember: every one of these Black List screenplays will probably knock your socks off.  Find them online, read them.  Then come back here and tell me how you'd change the logline to do justice to the story.

[Pitchpatch]

CATHERINE THE GREAT - good
Kristina Lauren Anderson

Sophia Augusta takes control of her life, her marriage, and her kingdom becoming Russia's most celebrated and beloved monarch: Catherine the Great.



Expands outward in nested spheres of power.  No need for detail because it's a historical figure – drop the name and drop the mic.  Problematic only because there's no hint of opposition – unless you have a firm grasp on Russian history.  I'm giving it a “good” because the mere mention of the name promises an epic cinematic expedition across a seminal piece of Russian history.

[Pitchpatch]

ROCKINGHAM - nope
Adam Morrison

A look into the mania of the OJ Simpson trial, through the eyes of Simpson's sports agent Mike Gilbert and Los Angeles Police Department Detective Mark Fuhrman.



Sadly D.O.A.  LL has a lackluster, documentary feel and generates a level of excitement too small to measure — unless you're an ant equipped with comically oversized stethoscope.

I don't know how to improve this logline other than tear it down and start over.  Moving on...

[Pitchpatch]

THE SWIMSUIT ISSUE - good
Randall Green

A nerdy high schooler, who fancies himself an amateur photographer, attempts to create a "Swimsuit Issue" featuring his high school classmates in hopes of raising enough money to go to summer camp.



"Nerdy," "fancies," "attempts," and "hopes" all foreshadow conflict and struggle.  Strong goal and through-line.  Why summer camp?  Because of a certain girl?  I reckon so.

[Pitchpatch]

THE BABYSITTER - good
Brian Duffield

A lonely twelve-year-old boy in love with his babysitter discovers some hard truths about life, love, and murder.



"Murder" -- saves the kicker for last, wrapped up in a "rule of threes" format.  Good job.  Leaves hanging the age of the babysitter.  Consider how knowing the age changes your expectations: “... in love with his [17][35][52]-year-old babysitter...”

[Pitchpatch]

ROTHCHILD - good
John Patton Ford

A young, well-educated loner kills the members of his mother's estranged family one-by-one in hopes that he will inherit the family's vast fortune.



Seethes with intrigue and high drama.  Money as motivation is something we all understand.  Simple, powerful story spine.  However, the LL risks leaving us feeling like we've seen the whole movie.  Hinting at a twist or a complication would mitigate that risk.  Maybe something like:

"An intelligent young loner will need to do more than kill his mother's relatives one by one to inherit his family's vast fortune."

[Pitchpatch]

THE WALL - good
Dwain Worrell

A sniper and his spotter must kill and avoid being killed, separated from an enemy sniper by only a 16x6ft prayer wall.



Proximity is the exciting element in this LL.  I wonder if some mojo leaks out by not hinting why the enemy sniper must be stopped.  For example:

"A sniper and his spotter must secure safe passage for a vital diplomatic convoy by eliminating the enemy sniper who's got them pinned behind a 16-by-6-foot prayer wall."

Suggesting stakes beyond basic survival boosts the overall appeal, I think.

[Pitchpatch]

THE CASCADE – nope (revised to "hmmm" on a second pass)
Kieran Fitzgerald

Based on the documentary style film "The Day Britain Stopped" directed by Gabriel Range, an oil tanker collides with an Iranian patrol boat in the Strait of Hormuz, triggering a chain of tragic disastrous events.



Feels generic and lacks a protagonist and through-line.  LL offers a promise of excitement but you have to take it on faith.  I'm unfamiliar with the documentary cited, so for me the LL can't simply name check and expect me to fill in the blanks.  I get annoyed with placeholder text like “a chain of tragic disastrous events.”  Give us something to chew on.

Looking at the source material's Wikipedia entry, THE DAY BRITAIN STOPPED is described as “based on a fictional disaster on 19 December 2003, in which a train strike is the first in a chain of events that lead to a meltdown of the country's transport system.”  Ah, okay.  Got it.  So, the movie – aptly named, I see now – charts a series of causally linked escalating events all the way to some unimaginable, shocking outcome.  That's actually a cool premise.

So, ignoring the first bit that gives context we're left with: "An oil tanker collides with an Iranian patrol boat in the Strait of Hormuz, triggering a chain of tragic disastrous events."  Not a terrible logline but not a good one.  It feels flat.  It shouldn't.  We're talking about events that rock one or more nations.  Surely there's a particular character weaving in and out of most story events?  Can't we tag along with that person?  If we can, here's what the logline might look like:

"An inexperienced government minister must stop a chain of escalating tragedies when an oil tanker collides with an Iranian patrol boat in the Strait of Hormuz."

Now we don't need the introductory context.  We let the logline lead.  The context follows and helps seal the deal in the room: "And by the way, it's based on the documentary style film 'The Day Britain Stopped' directed by Gabriel Range.  Have you seen it?  Also by the way, I know that's a picture of Sydney Harbour and the Opera House, not the Strait of Hormuz.  Let me explain in one word... Sequel."

[Pitchpatch]

AETHER - nope
Krysty Wilson-Cairns

In near future London, a revolutionary technology has been invented that can record sounds hours after they were made. Detective Harry Orwell, inventor of this technology, is part of a pilot program where investigators record and analyze past sound waves and finds himself the prime suspect while investigating a string of brutal murders.



Takes too long to make its pitch.  Raises all kinds of questions about the story rules for this new technology – like, exactly how many hours back can the tech capture a sound?  But a wordy logline ruins this interesting premise of retroactive sound recording.  Including the protagonist's name – an unnecessary element in all but biographical loglines – seems driven by the desire to throw a sly wink in George Orwell's direction.  With a slimmer logline this might earn a “good.”  Try this:

"A detective in near-future London invents a device to reconstruct recent sound waves.  While investigating a string of grisly murders, the device fingers him as the prime suspect."

[Pitchpatch]

SITUATION COMEDY - nope
Cat Vasko

A young woman, feeling directionless, stumbles upon a mysterious courtyard where she is transported into a sitcom-like universe, becoming a major character on this "TV show."



Makes me think of THE TRUMAN SHOW, but I'm just not that excited about this premise.  My motivation to read this script would be hoping Cat puts a new spin on this well-traveled "what if."  We can dramatically trim this logline:

"A mysterious courtyard channels an aimless young woman into a TV-sitcom universe where she becomes the star."

See what I did there with "channel"?  Awww yeeeah.  Do we really need to mention the courtyard McGuffin?  I'm not a fan.  So:

"An aimless young woman slips into a TV-sitcom universe where she becomes the star."

Brutally efficient, no?  Despite omitting the "mysterious courtyard" I think those roughly 14 words ably describes the premise as originally written.  Observe how stripping away extraneous words makes plain what's missing.  Not a hint of goal or opposition in this LL.  Without foreshadowing contrast and conflict, this definitely earns a “nope” from me.  Something engaging surely must happen on her journey to otherworldly stardom.  That's what I'd like to hear about in the logline.  Next time, crack the door open a little wider.

[Pitchpatch]

TAU - aces (yesss, our first ACES!)
Noga Landau

A woman held captive in the futuristic smart house of a serial kidnapper realizes that her only hope of escape lies in turning the house's sentient computer against its creator.



Good strong logline.  Protag, antag, opposition, goal.  The whole movie is right there – but in a good way, not in the “I don't need to see it because the logline gave it all away” way.  The logline benefits from a small shave.  I managed 30 words down to 20.  So, more like a shave and a haircut:

"A woman locked in her kidnapper's futuristic smart home must escape by turning the house's sentient computer against its creator."

Hot damn, that LL hits you square in the jaw.  I need to read this.

EDIT 30 June 2018 -- and here it is.

[Pitchpatch]

ECHO - hmmm
Chris MacBride

A CIA drone coordinator battles his own psychological health while trying to decipher whether his wife has been replaced.



Begs the question: replaced with what?  This logline excites but doesn't ignite.  There's only a slim tether between the two concepts of "CIA drone coordinator" and "substituted wife."  I feel the two elements need a stronger bond.

"An unraveling CIA drone pilot takes matters into his own hands when he suspects his wife has been replaced."

Something like that poses a much stronger cause-effect relationship between the drone element and the Stepford Wives intrigue.  You're left wondering: "All that firepower in the hands of a guy losing his marbles.  What the heck does he end up doing with that drone?"

EDIT, 23 June 2018: George Clooney circling to direct this.

[Pitchpatch]

MENA - hmmm
Gary Spinelli

In the late 1970s to mid 1980s, Barry Seal, a TWA pilot recruited by the CIA to provide reconnaissance on the burgeoning communist threat in Central America finds himself in charge of one of the biggest covert CIA operations in the history of the United States, one that spawned the birth of the Medellin cartel and eventually almost brought down the Reagan White House with the Iran Contra scandal.



Hooboy, that's a lot to digest in one logline!  Some big, powerful players here, which guarantees conflict and suspense.  Let's whittle it down to the essentials:

"A TWA pilot, recruited by the CIA to spy on communists in Central America, leads the biggest covert operation in U.S. History – one that gives rise to the Medellin Cartel and nearly brings down the Reagan Administration with the Iran-Contra scandal."

Contrasting the “rise” of the Medellin Cartel and the “fall” of the Reagan administration – that guided my word choices here.

The places and people supply sufficient context, I think, so we don't need specific time references.  Note the switch in tense from past to present, which injects timeliness and urgency into the LL.  I'm unsure about including backstory about the pilot's initial mission surrounding communism reconnaissance.  Let's see how it reads without it:

"A TWA pilot recruited by the CIA leads the biggest covert operation in U.S. history – one that creates the Medellin Cartel and nearly destroys the Reagan Administration with the Iran-Contra scandal."

Reads fine to me.  Let's go with that svelte 31-word revision over the 42- and 69-word versions.

[Pitchpatch]

DODGE - nope, nope nope nope
Scott Wascha

A genre bending action comedy about a pill popping thug who begins to develop superpowers.



This teenage slacker of a logline gets an emphatic “Nope, oh hells no” from me.  Anti-hero with superpowers is a brain burp, not a logline.  At least it's ruthlessly brief.  Could be briefer.  Luckily I have a black belt in beating up loglines.

"A pill-popping thug develops superpowers in this genre-bending action comedy."

Three words shaved for twenty percent saved.  But seriously, if you're going to fart in a paper bag and hand that to teacher as your completed assignment, Mr. Logline, just don't.  Please skip class altogether.  We won't mind and you won't embarrass yourself.  We might even mistake your no-fucks-given attitude for a rebellious, adorable spirit.

[Pitchpatch]

NORTH OF RENO - hmmm
Banipal Ablakhad , Benhur Ablakhad

A down and out prison guard attempts to murder a recently released inmate and steal a half million dollars in hidden heist money.



Or: "A desperate prison guard must murder a paroled felon to steal half a million in stashed heist money."

See how a few small changes turns up the heat?  The prison guard isn't just down and out, he's desperate.  He's not going to try; he absolutely must carry out this murder for reasons we're invited to speculate about.  In the original logline, personal greed appears to be the guard's motivation.  In the revision it feels more like he's driven to murder as a last resort, because he needs that money for something really, really important.  Note too the change from "and steal..." to "to steal..."  One must happen before the other.  Cause and effect.  In the original logline you could reasonably conclude the two events – killing the convict and stealing the money – don't depend on each other.

Now, I might be going off reservation here by pushing the story in a direction the author did not intend.  This exercise does, however, illustrate the importance of using the least words to say what you mean.  Unnecessary words slow down reading comprehension.