What I want my trick-or-treat bag to look like…
You knew it was coming.
It’s time, once again, to piece through some of the loglines that didn’t make the cut for Halloween Logline Showdown and discuss why they didn’t make it. When it comes to loglines, there are some common mistakes that are made. But the most common is that the writer doesn’t know how to structure the logline. So it feels more like a wandering thought than a movie with direction. As always, you can get help. I do logline consults for $25. E-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com.
In fact, the logline that won the voting last week, Last to Live, was one I helped the writer with. Well that’s not fair, Carson! You’re just rewarding people for buying your service! Actually, no. I did not include Last to Live in the showdown. It was only after Alex posted it in the comments and started getting a lot of positive reaction that I retroactively placed it in the competition. The point is, you want to put your best foot forward. Let’s find out why these other loglines didn’t make the list so that you can improve your own loglines moving forward.
Title: The Hot Kills
Genre: Slasher
Logline: In the sweaty, sultry summer of 1982 in New York City, a tight-knit gang of punk rockers on their way to an underground show are stalked by an obsessed killer.
Analysis: There’s something to this idea. But it struck me as one of those “almost there” concepts. I even wrote the writer and told him there was something missing. You always need at least one element in your logline to stand out. Something original. Cause that’s the thing that separates your script from all the other scripts. What’s the stand-out element here? 1982 New York City is more original than modern day. But is it enough to get me to read the script? The punk rockers? Yeah, that’s sort of unique. But again, there are shades of gray to this stuff. It’s never as simple as “good element/bad element.” Sometimes an element is decent but if it’s not paired up with a bigger element, it may not be enough to strike the potential reader’s interest. Then you have the ending. “Obsessed killer” is such a boring way to describe the antagonist. But the real real REAL problem here is the dynamic. You have four punk rockers, who, from my knowledge of punk, are usually pretty tough guys. And ONE KILLER??? Why would these guys be scared??? To make a horror movie work, your hero has to seem outgunned, not have the clear advantage.
Title: Tomb
Genre:Horror
Logline: When desperate thieves who yearn for a fresh start discover a fountain of youth in a house where a gruesome crime occurred, they must escape before terrifying wrathful ghosts trap them forever.
Analysis: This is one of those loglines where, immediately after I read it, I had to go back and read it again to fully understand it. That’s a bad sign. I don’t think the logline is bad. I just think there’s a bit too much going on. You have thieves who, presumably, are robbing a house. That’s one element. They discover a fountain of youth. That’s another element. A gruesome crime. Third element. Wrathful ghosts. Fourth element. And maybe even a fifth element since the ghosts want to trap them there forever. That’s a lot going on and I just think it could’ve been simplified. Also, something about this fountain of youth isn’t gelling with wrathful ghosts for me. I’m sure it makes sense within the context of the script. But in logline form, they don’t naturally work well off each other. One idea to make this concept better would be to organically link the protagonists to the concept. For example, if these were desperate 70-year-old thieves, now the fountain of youth feels more relevant. As constructed, the idea doesn’t feel cohesive enough.
Title: BASKEL VILLAGE
Genre: Horror
Logline: A young Marine and his badly burnt little Brother have been sent to Baskel Village, Maine for treatment. Tunnels under this abandoned ski town have a miraculous way of healing ghastly wounds if one can walk through them three times. A secret government facility has been set up to help soldiers accomplish this feat except… No one has ever made it through. A CURE FOR WELLNESS meets BARBARIAN with a dash of INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE.
Analysis: I wanted to include this one despite it being such a beginner logline because a lot of writers are making similar mistakes. At most, your logline should be two sentences. It should never be three. And 97% of the time, it should be one sentence. That mistake alone dooms you. But also, you’ve got too much going on here. Figure out what the real hook is and build your logline around that. The “hook” seems to be these healing tunnels. So write one sentence centered around healing tunnels. “Two badly injured marines try and make it through the infamous Baskel Tunnel, which is said to have incredible healing powers, if you can make it to the end…” Even cleaned up though, I don’t see enough of a marketable concept here. It feels too obscure. Oh, and never reference a movie that did poorly at the box office (Cure For Wellness) when pitching your material!
Title: No Body Recovered
Genre: Thriller/Mystery
Logline: Following a police raid on his homeless encampment in rural Oregon, a wounded man, desperate to find refuge and start his life anew, agrees to stay with a local fisherman — unaware that his new host harbors ulterior, sinister motives…
Analysis: The first part of this logline sort of caught my interest. Again, I want to emphasize that the acceptance or rejection of a logline occurs on a scale. It’s not always “DEFINITELY YES” or “DEFINITELY NO.” Oftentimes, I struggle with how much I like an idea. In the end, I simply ask, “Do I want to open the script?” If the answer is yes, I know that there’s more good than bad. So this starts out good. Homelessness is very topical on the West Coast right now. But then we take a hard left turn into this fisherman, who comes out of nowhere. That was jarring to me. How are we all of a sudden in a fishing movie? Remember, you started out in “rural” Oregon. No lakes or oceans have been mentioned (I’m imagining trees). But the nail in the coffin was “ulterior sinister motives.” These are platitudes and they mean nothing to script readers. You need to be detailed. You need to tell us what the motives are if you want us to request the script.
Title: Give It Your All
Genre: Horror
Logline: When a German fitness guru returns from the dead and curses his laziest ex-clients to walk forever without rest, two of his fangirls must overcome their cult-like brainwashing to save their hexed pregnant friend before the baby arrives.
Analysis: The first mistake here is not including “Comedy-Horror” as the genre. I mean, I’m hoping to death it’s a comedy. Cause if you’re starting your logline out with, “When a German fitness guru returns from the dead and curses his laziest ex-clients to walk forever without rest…” and it’s not a comedy? You are living in a different reality than the rest of us. But even if the comedy label was clearly assigned, this script does a 180 in its second half that feels completely detached from what had been set up. People, the elements in your logline have to organically connect. If we’re in rural tree-laden Oregon, why are we all of a sudden hanging out with fishermen? If we’re dealing with a demon German fitness guru who’s forcing his clients to run, why are we all of a sudden dealing with a pregnancy? Sometimes I don’t think writers are able to see their loglines objectively. Cause if they did, they’d clearly see that these two halves are not connected. They sound like two different movies.
Title: Not Alone
Genre: Horror (Found Footage)
Logline: A contestant on a popular survival competition show goes missing and when her footage is recovered, it’s revealed that a strange breed may have turned her into prey.
Analysis: I’m trying to come up with an acronym for loglines like this. I’m favoring, “2VNC,” which stands for Too Vague Needs Context. A “strange breed” is so vague I’m not even sure what to do with it. A strange breed of what? Aren’t there hundreds of thousands of animal breeds on this planet? And then you have this rather mundane climax. “Turned her into prey.” It feels way too basic. Again, you need that standout element that’s going to sell your concept. Maybe the ‘breed’ part of this logline is the standout element, if it’s some cool unique monster. But that needs to be included in the logline if you want people to request the script. You can’t hide it.
Title: Doomsday (Pilot)
Genre: Conspiracy Thriller
Pilot Logline: Five years after the United States and Russia engaged in a nuclear war, a freelance journalist seeks the aid of a former White House Communications Director in proving a vast conspiracy behind the decision to launch the warheads.
Analysis: This is a good example of the importance of seeing challenges down the road before you start writing a script and deciding whether those challenges are worth it. Cause when you read this logline, it doesn’t make sense. “Five years after the United States and Russia engaged in a nuclear war, a freelance journalist…”. No no no no no. There is no freelance journalist after the United States and Russia engaged in a nuclear war. There is NOBODY after the United States and Russia engaged in a nuclear war. And definitely not five short years later. But let’s just say that the writer has a good reason for why society still exists after a superpower nuclear war. Maybe only 3 or 4 nukes were launched, for example, before they were able to stop a full-out nuke launch. Well, unless you can easily explain that in your logline, you’re never going to get any requests. Cause everyone’s going to react the same way I did. “How is there still a functioning society after the U.S. and Russia engage in a nuclear war?” If you don’t have a plan for how you’re going to answer the tough questions your specific idea creates, it may not be worth it to write the script in the first place.
Title: Dark Frost
Genre: Horror
Logline: A crowd phobic woman becomes the lone winterkeeper at Glacier National Park in order to escape society, but must fight her way back to the world when a pack of nocturnal creatures emerges from the mountains, determined to kill every living thing in their path.
Analysis: This logline starts out clunky right away. “Crowd phobic.” It’s an unappetizing way to describe your protagonist. The idea itself isn’t bad. But when it comes to concepts like these, I’m looking for clever connections between the elements. I don’t like when the elements feel isolated from one another. We have this winter-centric National Park backdrop for a horror film. So my mind is in “cold” mode. Then we have “nocturnal creatures” as our main antagonists. So we’ve gone from a story that seemed like it was going to focus on the unique element of cold, and just threw in some night creatures? Where’s the clever connection? In the Vin Diesel movie, Pitch Black, the nocturnal creatures were a more organic part of the story because this planet only experienced night once every hundred years. So when night unexpectedly came and the nocturnal creatures arrived, it felt like one cohesive narrative that had been carefully set up. This does not feel like that.
Title: Night at The Morgue
Genre: Horror / Comedy
Logline: A female med student on her first night on the job at the morgue, befriends a ghost. The vampires, werewolves, zombies and tentacled Cthulhu monster who attack her that first night insist that ghosts aren’t real.
Analysis: I get quite a bit of entries like this one, where I don’t even know what I read, to the point where I’m not sure how I would critique the logline. Besides the confusing premise, where’s the conflict? It sounds to me like this script follows a med student sitting at a table with her monster friends for 90 minutes and they tease her for seeing a ghost. I’m not sure how that’s a movie.
Title: THREE BAD SEEDS
Genre: Thriller
Logline: A teen orphan and her two friends invade the home of the man she believes got away with murdering her mother ten years ago and try to coerce a confession out of him.
Analysis: I wanted to finish off by critiquing one of Brett’s entries. He’s always such a cool positive guy that I wanted him to know why this didn’t make it. Simply put, there’s no special attractor here. There’s a personal element, as the protagonists are confronting the person who murdered one of their moms. But it’s just not an original enough setup to get me to request the script. I know Brett also submitted his fumigator entry. The reason I haven’t picked that one for any of the showdowns is because when I think “fumigation,” I think comedy. And the script is always pitched as straight horror (or thriller). Brett, get the 5 logline evals for $75 deal and I’ll tell you which script you should write next. For that matter, if any of you are tired of sending loglines out that never get script requests, it may be that you’re picking weak concepts. Figure out a great concept BEFORE you write the script and then you can write the script knowing that, when you finish, people are going to read it. 5 loglines for $75 deal is live for the weekend. E-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com.
Look, picking a good concept is hard. That’s not a mystery. Even when we learn the difference between good and bad ideas, we still fall in love with unmarketable movie ideas because we have some personal connection to them, making it hard to be objective. Just make sure you’re all getting feedback, preferably BEFORE you write the script, not after.
Join me tomorrow for the winning logline script review: When six influencers perform a stunt that inadvertently kills the daughter of a cartel boss, he forces them to undertake a deadly series of their own YouTube challenges. SAW meets MR BEAST
Today we take on the genre YOU SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON if making money is your priority as a screenwriter.
Genre: True Crime
Premise: Set in 1981, a serial killer kidnaps his latest victim, who proceeds to use religion to convince him that he is not the killer he has accepted himself to be.
About: Huge bidding war for this one that Amazon/MGM just won. It was an article in Vanity Fair. Stephen Morin’s killings are mostly forgotten over time due to several reasons, one of them being that the victim in this story, Margy Palm, wasn’t interested in selling the rights to her story to Hollywood, who she felt would turn it into some cheap surface-level story about the power of God. Only recently having gone through therapy, Palm has come to the conclusion that it’s finally time that her story be told.
Writer: Julie Miller
Details: About 6000 words long (the length of 4 Scriptshadow posts)
Sydney Sweeney is perrrrrrfect for this role.
What is it that Jerry Maguire said on that fateful day of his firing?
Oh yeah.
SHOWWWW MEEEE THE MONAAAAAAAYYYY!!!
Ever since the spec boom ended, screenwriters have been looking for a substitute source of instant income, a way where they could write something and get paid for it immediately. Well, my friends, that something is here. It’s called True Crime.
True Crime has always sold. Heck, they were making these things as TV movies all the way back in the 70s. But ever since podcasts supercharged the genre, True Crime has become more marketable than ever.
From The Watcher to Dirty John to Love & Death to The Staircase to The Act to Mindhunter to Dahmer. And now you have this whole new sub-genre of shows inspired by true crime, like Only Murders in the Building, Based on a True Story, and The Afterparty.
Without mincing words, you have to be more into television than movies if you want to sell one of these things. But it actually doesn’t matter because, in order to sell them, you’re going to write an article first. Whoever then buys the article will decide if they want to turn it into a movie or a TV show.
“True Crime: True Faith,” set in Texas in 1981, introduces us to Stephen Morin, a serial killer who seems to have escaped mainstream attention due to the fact that he was killing at the same time as the much flashier hipper serial killer, Ted Bunny.
Morin targets a young pretty blonde wife named Margy Palm, who’s returning to her car from K-Mart after doing some Christmas shopping. At this point, Morin had raped and killed dozens of women, something Palm wasn’t yet aware of. But she knew once he took her hostage that he was an angry dangerous man.
And yet, as he made her drive outside of San Antonio to a more secluded area to do who knows what with her, Palm didn’t feel afraid. A religious woman, she began explaining to Morin that he had the devil inside of him and during the many times when they’d park (Morin would get hungry, for example, and randomly head to some fast food restaurant) she would attempt to cast the demons out of his head.
At first, Morin was furious that he’d been stuck with some “religious freak.” But the more Palm spoke about God, the more sense it made to the killer. Palm busted out some scripture for Morin to read and soon, the two were sharing deep intense experiences from their pasts, bonding on a level that even Palm admits, to this day, she had never experienced before.
After 8 hours of driving around, Palm had successfully converted Morin into a born-again Christian. His lifelong anger had all but evaporated. She told him that there was a preacher he needed to visit in another part of Texas and took Morin to the train station so he could go to this man and confess his sins. She gave him her scripture and off he went. The police were waiting for him at the station where he was still reading the scripture.
Morin would later go on to receive three life sentences and the death penalty. But Morin started to call Palm from prison and, unthinkably, the two became friends. Palm would come to see him 15 times over the next four years and visited him a day before his execution. Morin called those last four years the best four years of his life because he found God.
The real Margy Palm
Time to start writing some true crime articles, right!
I know some of you are like, “ehhh, I don’t know. I just want to write scripts, Carson. I don’t want to write short stories or articles or any of that nonsense.” I get it. We writers are creatures of habit. But let me say this. One of the things I would’ve changed when I was a young screenwriter was not being so stubborn. I thought I knew how to do it and I was only going to do it that way. I know that if I was more open to other ideas and trying new things, my path would’ve been different.
There’s a reason these articles are selling beyond them being true crime. Much like short stories, they’re easily digestible to busy industry people. Which means that when agents send these packages out, people are more willing to read them because the time investment is much smaller.
So, how do you find a good true crime story to write about?
It’s not that different from looking for any concept. You’re looking for fresh angles that haven’t been explored yet. You’re looking for interesting characters, meaty parts that actors would want to play. And as I tell you all the time, you’ve discovered a gold mine if the true crime story has some element of irony to it.
One particular sentence stuck out to me in this article. “I became friends with a serial killer.” Take a good long look at the line. That line is the face of irony. You’re not supposed to be friends with a serial killer. Serial killers are evil. Especially ones who wanted to kill you. And yet that’s the primary relationship here – one where this offbeat friendship emerges from the most unlikely of circumstances.
I can imagine how they might adapt this into a TV show. You start off with this scene in prison where Palm has come to visit Morin. We don’t know who these people are yet or the context under which they know each other. But they’re laughing. They’re having a good time. And then we smash-cut back to that fateful day where he grabs her in the parking lot and forces her into the car.
You could have a lot of fun juxtaposing those two worlds. And, actually, you could write this as a movie as well, if you wanted. Any time you see a tight timeframe, that’s ideal for a film. That 8 hours that Morin kidnaps Palm for… that’s a perfect timeframe for a movie, especially if you could convince us that she really was in danger and that he’s going to kill her.
But this one comes back to the characters. Good memorable characters are sooooooooo hard to write. They’re so hard to write. It amazes me whenever one shows up in a movie. And it shocks me when one shows up in a screenplay, where you’re even less likely to run into well-written characters.
Morin goes through this clear arc as a character that is perfect for a story. But he’s also volatile. The article points out that one second he’s sharing his biggest regrets to Palm and the next he’s screaming at her for being rich and having a perfect life. Then you have Palm, who’s the perfect underdog. She’s the overmatched girl who should die just like the 30 girls before her. But she’s ACTIVE and takes a different tactic than you’re supposed to take. And it ends up working and… who’s not going to root for that character?
Also, the same rule for storytelling applies today as it did 100 years ago: If you have at least one dead body, you’ve got yourself a story.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[xx] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: So many writers revert to guns and violence for their characters to solve problems. But I promise you that it is ALWAYS more satisfying to the audience and to the reader if the character OUTWITS their opponent. That’s what this story is about. It’s about a woman who outthinks her captor.
Genre: Drama (Book)
Premise: Two brilliant college kids take their lifelong love of games and turn it into a successful video game company, only for life to test their company, and them, in ways that neither of them could possibly prepare for.
About:Last year, if you asked anyone with a penchant for reading what book you should read next, 3 out 4 people would’ve told you, “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow.” Novelist Gabrielle Zevin has been writing books for nearly 2 decades. But none has caught on like this one did. When asked how she came up with the idea, she said that she was in a slump and did what writers do when they’re slumping – procrastinate. Her preferred form of procrastination was video games. But when she found out that her favorite game from her youth, Gold Rush, was no longer available to play, she felt a sense of loss that inspired an idea she encapsulated in just two sentences: “2 video game developers. Their games are their lives.” Zevin never expected in a million years that her offbeat novel would become her most successful one. But something about the characters clicked with readers. It didn’t take long for the book’s success to catch the attention of Hollywood. Paramount snatched the rights off the market for a cool 2 million.
Writer: Gabrielle Zevin
Details: 416 pages
The reason I wanted to review Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow is because it’s the kind of book that’s not supposed to do as well as it did. The books that do well are where some girl is missing, a woman is in a toxic relationship, a concubine is trying to survive in 1820s South Africa, or yet another Holocaust-adjacent story.
There is no proven market for thoughtful stories that span 15 years about video game pals. I like any piece of writing that disproves the narrative so I signed up for Tomorrow x 3. More importantly, when a book or script proves the market wrong, it’s often because the story is amazing. It has to be if it’s going to disprove the trend.
The story starts in the late 1980s in Los Angeles. A young whip-smart girl named Sadie Green is hanging out in the kid’s room at a hospital while her parents tend to her sick sister. It is there where she meets Sam Masur, a weird kid with a severely damaged foot due to a catastrophic car crash that killed his single mom. To pass the time, the two play Super Mario Brothers together and, over the next several months, develop a friendship.
Many years later, when Sam is at Harvard, he runs into Sadie, who’s also going to school out east. “You still play video games?” She asks him. Of course, Sam says. Sadie hands him a disk. “It’s a game I made. Let me know what you think.” Sam goes back to his dorm room where his roommate, Marx (the opposite of Sam in every way – handsome, social, popular) grabs the game and starts playing it. “This is amazing,” he tells Sam.
Sam agrees and gets the wild idea to make a game with Sadie. Over the summer, they create Ichigo, a game about a young child who gets swept out to sea during a tsunami and must somehow make it back to land. The inspired game becomes a sensation and Sam and Sadie are anointed “the next big thing” in video games.
After a not-as-successful sequel, the two head back to their hometown of Los Angeles to start a company with Marx as the CEO. The next game they create is called “Both Sides,” where the main character can switch back and forth between their ordinary mundane life and a heightened intense world where they are a hero. The game is a big enough hit to grow their company.
But the press has a tough time with Sadie and Sam. Despite the two spending every single second together, they are not, nor have they ever been, romantically involved. They’re so flummoxed by their relationship that they eventually give up on trying to make them a thing, instead focusing on Sam’s unique story, which involves his underdog persona brought on by his disfigured foot (Sam must walk around everywhere with a cane).
Eventually, Sadie finds herself being drawn more and more towards Marx, and the two surprise each other by becoming an item. As this is happening, Sam and Sadie’s relationship is deteriorating due to a number of factors (differences in opinion on the company’s direction, Sadie not getting as much credit as Sam from the press, Sadie refusing to make another sequel to Ichigo) and it’s looking like their professional future is in doubt.
(Spoiler but without details) But then something so devastating happens that the two will be forced to reevaluate everything about their friendship, their business, and their lives. Worst of all, this tragedy threatens to destroy the one thing in their lives that they have always been able to turn to when they’ve been down – the simple beauty of getting lost in the brilliant and fun world of video games.
The thing that struck me most about this book was the absence of plot.
It was jarring, at times, how little plot was guiding the story.
The novel, instead, is 98% character. Luckily, it excels in that department. Sam is the most interesting character. At first I thought his broken foot was just a way to get him in the same hospital as Sadie so the author could start their friendship.
But Sam’s foot is its own storyline. Maybe that’s a lesson right off the bat when it comes to plotless stories. Utilize storylines within the character’s life that can become their own pseudo-plots. His foot situation is so complicated that it gets worse and worse over the years until he finally has to amputate it. That alone was a tough pill to swallow. Cause you could see how much it shaped his view of the world.
Another thing about Sam is that he’s asexual. I can’t remember if I’ve ever read a story with an asexual main character. I’ve read every sexuality under the sun, especially over these last few years (homosexual, bisexual, demisexual, pansexual). But asexual? That’s a new one. And it helped make both Sam, and Sam’s relationship with Sadie, wholly unique.
Sadie isn’t as interesting as Sam – she’s basically a poor kid in rich kids shoes – but there’s a certain defiance of conventional thought in her that makes her fun to try and figure out. She shouldn’t be the kind of person who befriends a kid like Sam. And yet she does. And it helps that we’re always trying to figure out, despite their identities (he’s asexual, she sees their relationship as a loving friendship only) if they’re going to get together.
Then you have Marx, a dude who’s incredibly good-looking and charming and gets tons of girls because of it. But he doesn’t have any of the talent Sam or Sadie has. So he’s sort of like the perfect stick in their mud. His presence adds an unpredictable dynamic to the OG friendship that’s fun to speculate on. “Will Marx go for Sadie?” is a question we’re asking almost immediately.
It’s amazing that Zevin is able to get so many pages out of just these three characters doing nothing. I say “nothing” while laughing to myself because I know they’re making video games and growing their company. But the game development in the book becomes repetitive. They just made a game. So making another one isn’t exactly compelling to read. Yet we enjoy seeing how this trio deals with the challenges that come with success.
(Spoilers from here on out) Maybe the reason this book did so well is that their success never feels cliched. This isn’t like a music biopic where you see a singer become famous out of nowhere then stumble into drug use and excess. That’s not this story. Their success is more up and down, which more appropriately mirrors real life. So it feels authentic.
But the main reason I think this book is so popular is because the guy and the girl don’t get together. Think back through novel and movie history when you’ve had a story where the guy and the girl don’t get together at the end. I’m not talking because one has to go to war. Or because outside factors forced them apart. I’m talking about they just don’t get together. Even though they could. I don’t know if it’s ever happened.
So you’re reading this book all the way up to the very last page hoping that it’s finally going to happen. And it doesn’t! It’s so unexpected. It goes to show that if you want to write something that breaks out, you will have to make at least one bold creative choice, the kind of choice that all the books and teachers would tell you never to do.
I have no doubt that when Zevin sent this book out to her friends for notes, they said, “You have to have Sadie and Sam get together!” It’s just not done that you write a book about a girl and a boy over the course of 15 years and there’s never a single romantic moment between them. It’s crazy. And yet I have no doubt that it’s a major reason why this book is such a hit.
Now, I don’t know what Zevin was thinking when she signed on to make this a movie. Maybe she was thinking, “I want a new house.” But this is not a movie. Not in a million years is it a movie. It’s so emphatically a TV show. It’s kind of like the anti-Normal People. That show was about a guy and girl who get into a years-long drawn out sexual and, at times, meaningful relationship. This is about a guy and a girl who get into a years-long drawn out friendship.
TV is character. This novel is character. But we’ll see. It’s such a beloved novel that I’m sure they’ll do everything in their power to make the movie as good as it can be (Zevin is writing the screenplay so she can stay true to her vision). But this could easily be a TV show, and not just a limited one. You could follow these two and their unique friendship for years if need be.
Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow is, at times, difficult to read. The conventions you’re used to never arrive, leaving you frustrated. But once you’re able to finish the book and see the entire canvas, you realize how good it actually is.
[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[xx] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: Don’t get down if your latest script was a dud! Your next screenplay could be the one that launches you into the stratosphere. Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow has sold over 1 million copies. But you know how many copies Zevin’s previous book sold? “Young Jane Young,” about a congressional intern who’s publicly shamed for having an affair with her boss (arguably the more marketable concept), sold just 10,000 copies. Just need to find that idea that pops!
Is Killers of the Flower Moon a tour de force worthy of the highest cinematic praise or is it a film that broke everyone working on it?
Genre: Drama/Period/Historical
Premise: A dimwitted soldier returns from the war to a different town than the one he left, one that has been reshaped by the fortunes of the Osage tribe, which discovered a gigantic oil reserve on their land, which has made them the richest people per capita in the world.
About: This is the looooooooong in development movie from Apple/Paramount, the only film left this year that people believe can compete with Oppenheimer and Barbie for Oscars. It’ll be in theaters for a month before hitting the streaming service. Its 9 hour running time seems to be hurting its box office take, as the movie has clocked in only 24 million dollars this weekend. Although Oppenheimer was the same length and took in 82 million. Maybe the film needed a toy movie counterpart to beef up its marketing footprint. “Bratz” maybe? Not sure how that title combo would work. Bratzenflower? Eric Roth (Forrest Gump, Dune, A Star is Born) wrote the movie, along with Scorsese, who reportedly took a crack at a couple of drafts.
Writer: Eric Roth and Martin Scorsese (based on the non-fiction book by David Grann)
Details: 210 minutes!!!
I can’t tell you how excited I was about this movie when it was first announced. I’d read the book and it just sounded like such an interesting story. You had this Native American tribe, who I’d never heard of, that were at one point, some of the richest people in the world. When you combined that with the birth of the FBI, it’s that rare storytelling gold nugget that all us writers are searching for.
But every update to the project since then has been wrapped in tension and consternation.
They originally wrote a script that adhered to the structure of the book (You can read my review of the book here) but DiCaprio started questioning how interesting his character (an FBI agent investigating a series of murders) was and decided he instead wanted to play the villain.
The script was then rewritten to flesh out the villain role for Leo but, again, DiCaprio balked, feeling like something was missing. He also wondered if he had jumped shipped too quickly, and re-entertained the idea of playing the protagonist.
Meanwhile, the town was going through a socio-political revolution, pushing for diversity on a level never before seen. Questions such as, ‘Who has the right to tell which story?’, rattled industry mainstays like Scorsese, and he began wondering if the Native American tribe depicted in his film was being overshadowed. Maybe the Osage should hold the dominant point of view in the story, not yet another Caucasian male lead.
But that might lead to another problem. If the Osage became the protagonists, could Scorsese, a Caucasian male director, still direct the film? Shouldn’t someone who better understood the life experience of the Osage be directing the picture?
But how would audiences feel if they went to see a movie where an unknown director replaced one of the greatest directors in history and where Leonardo DiCaprio played a secondary character as opposed to the lead? And would the studio risk 200 million dollars on such a movie?
DiCaprio would make Scorsese’s life even worse, coming back to him with a demand to scrap the current script they had slaved over. “Where is the heart of this story?” Dicaprio would ask. Back to the drawing board they went, this time with so many roadblocks that it was unclear if there was any path forward that would be both creatively entertaining and non-offensive.
After a stellar showing at the Cannes film festival and a wonderful first trailer, the mega-production finally seemed to find its footing. There is plenty of evidence that the best art comes out of conflict and struggle. Maybe all that tension was worth it.
But then the press tour started and the lead female actress, Lily Gladstone, started taking shots at other productions. Although her comments weren’t exactly out-of-pocket, it seemed like a strange move to announce your breakout lead actress with such negativity. Then things seemed to reach a boiling point this weekend when Scorsese acknowledged that both he and Robert De Niro would ‘roll their eyes’ at DiCaprio’s many adlibs during filming. It was starting to look like Killers of the Flower Moon broke everyone who worked on it.
With all that said, it’s still Scorsese. It’s still DiCaprio. It’s still De Niro. In a world where movies like, “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” terrorize our collective intelligence, there is no doubt that these three men care deeply about creating great cinema. Let’s see if they’ve created something great here.
Killers of the Flower Moon follows Ernest Burkhart, a dimwitted World War 1 soldier who spent most of his time in the war as a cook, as he returns to his hometown to work for his uncle, and town patriarch, William Hale (who refers to himself as “King”). Hale seems determined to set Ernest off on the right path, and encourages him to marry the Osage woman, Mollie, he drives around.
Ernest does and the two set about having a family. As the years pass, people in, as well as connected to, the Osage tribe, start dying. Some of illness. Others get murdered. A couple of those people are Mollie’s sisters. Strangely, nobody ever looks into these deaths. People shrug their shoulders and move on.
After a while (what feels like hours to be honest), we reveal little slivers of evidence that Ernest and Hale are involved in these murders. Like a lot of things that happen in Killers of the Flower Moon, clarity is absent. If someone is going to be killed, it usually works like this: Hale tells Ernest who tells a second middle man who then tells a final guy, who then goes and kills the target.
Meanwhile, Ernest, who takes care of his ill wife, who’s having a hard time with diabetes, starts injecting her with insulin laced with poison, as he’s looking to eventually off his wife, presumably for her money, even though he already has access to her money seeing as he’s married to her.
Finally, two hours and forty-five minutes into the movie, the FBI shows up, determined to figure out who’s killing the Osage. It doesn’t take Agent White long to sniff out who’s responsible for the carnage. But can he get Ernest to turn on his Uncle? And will Ernest even be able to last until the court case, as his Uncle appears to have unlimited access to killers?
I have to be careful what I say here because my initial reaction when the movie ended was not positive. I was borderline furious, mainly because 4 hours (with AMC’s previews) is a big time commitment and you want to feel like that was time well spent. I didn’t think this was time well spent at all.
With that said, I have to acknowledge the filmmaking side of the equation. It’s a beautiful movie. The production value was insane. I never once felt like I was on a set. I never once got pulled out of the movie because of something I saw onscreen. And then you have these titan actors working together who can make you forget everything just through their interactions.
It’s funny because one the things I tell you guys is to never just sit two characters down in front of each other and write a scene. It’s the least interesting way you can possibly write a scene. So what’s the first scene we get when Ernest comes back from the war and visits his Uncle? The two sit down across from each other in two chairs and talk for seven minutes.
I quickly leaned that that rule doesn’t apply when you have Leonardo DiCaprio and Robert De Niro. That was actually one of my favorite scenes in the film and it was mostly backstory.
But the movie quickly fell out of favor with me due to several screenwriting issues. They were…
No active protagonist
Weak protagonist
Major motivation issues
Inconsistent story engines
Let’s go through that list one by one. Your main character in this movie – Ernest – is not proactive. He’s reactive. He waits for orders. He waits to be told what to do. While this type of character can work in unique situations, it almost never does. Stories work better when your hero is pushing the narrative forward themselves. Cause then they’re taking us on the journey.
They may have been able to get around this had we liked the character of Ernest. But we don’t. He’s weak. He’s dumb. He’s a weasel. He’s cowardly. Just read those adjectives back for a second and then ask yourself, has there even been a non-comedy movie where a main character with those traits has worked? No. Of course not. Nobody likes a weasel.
There’s this saying that arrived in the late 90s that rebuffed the studio executives’ constant demand for “likable characters.” The screenwriters pushed back with: “No, my main character doesn’t have to be likable. He just has to be interesting.” This movie proves that that is wrong. Cause Ernest is an interesting character. But we don’t want to have anything to do with him. And he’s the one taking us on this journey. How are we going to enjoy a movie with a weasel leading us?
But the real problem with Killers of the Flower Moon is motivation. I have never seen a movie with murkier motivation throughout. Everywhere you look, you’re not sure why people are doing things.
Take Hale. Hale is desperately coveting every single cent he can get a hold of. He opens a new insurance scam every month to claim an extra 25 grand (800,000 dollars in today’s money). And he’s killing all these Osage people so that he will eventually inherit their money though his nephews. The dude is 75 YEARS OLD!!! He’s already sickeningly wealthy. He has a super successful ranching business. And he’s making a million bucks an insurance scam multiple times a year.
WHY DOES HE NEED MORE MONEY?????
What’s the end game here? He’s already suuuuuuper rich. You may say, “Because even if he dies, then Ernest gets the money. So the money stays in his family.” Except that Hale is ready to sell his nephew out to the feds! To save himself, he’s going to send Ernest to prison for the rest of his life.
In movies, money needs to have a point. It’s never about stealing a million bucks from the bank. It’s that obtaining that million bucks allows the character to retire for the rest of their life. What was Hale’s motivation for trying to upgrade from “really rich” to “really rich plus more rich?”
But the motivation that infuriated me the most was the insulin poison story. First of all, what does Ernest achieve by killing his wife? He already controls all of his wife’s money. And the script does a terrible job explaining how the poisoning is working. Cause Mollie starts off as having serious health issues from diabetes. Then she starts taking insulin. The insulin makes her worse. Then, many scenes later, the poison is introduced. Ernest starts putting a little bit of poison in her insulin. So Mollie continues to get sick. But she was already getting sick before the poison so we’re not even clear on if he’s poisoning her or not. It’s so unnecessarily confusing that it made me officially give up on the script. The plot of this movie must have flown through the Bermuda Triangle. Cause it was lost and never found again.
I understand why Leo resisted the FBI agent version of this story. There’s something too obvious about it. If you find a less obvious character to lead the story, you’re more likely to write an original movie. Which they did. This is definitely more original than had they gone the FBI agent route.
But you know what a plot becomes when it’s led by an FBI agent looking into a murder? It becomes a FOCUSED PLOT. It becomes a plot with an actual story engine. We feel like there’s a purpose to every scene and to the movie in general. Without that, this narrative was blowing in the wind the entire time. It was desperately trying to find anything to make the story matter.
The pinnacle of this was in the final 20 minutes when one of Ernest’s kids dies of a sickness. I threw up my hands at that point. You had already made us suffer for 3 hours straight with depressing story beat after depressing story beat and now you’re going to randomly kill off a kid who we hadn’t even met????
It’s desperation. This is what you do when you don’t have a plot. You reach for melodramatic story beats that artificially jolt the film.
The supposed reason for the death was so that Ernest, who was in prison, could decide that now he needed to raise his family. Which meant that he had to testify against Hale so he (Ernest) would stay out of prison. But wait a minute. Are you saying that when he had three full kids he didn’t need to raise them then?? Now that he only has two, he does??? It’s so nonsensical, I don’t even know how to react. I’m so frustrated by this screenplay.
It seems to me that Leo was putting pressure on Scorsese and Eric Roth to figure it all out. He kept telling them to change things and, at a certain point, Scorsese and Roth had to concede logic to make their star happy. Not that Leo was doing this maliciously. I think he honestly wants to make great movies. But sometimes he’s so obsessed with the complexity of his character – and this dates all the way back to his frustration with the Jack character in Titanic – that he doesn’t realize how it affects the rest of the script.
If I were judging this on just the script, it might be a “what the hell did I just read?” Since I’m looking at the whole movie, though, I do think there’s some good stuff in here, De Niro’s performance being the most notable. This script, though. This script was not good.
[ ] What the hell did I just watch?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the price of admission
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius
What I learned: Identify the character in your concept who has the strongest goal. That should probably be your main character. In this movie, the person with the strongest goal is the FBI Agent White. He’s the one who’s trying to solve these murders. Leo should have just played him. I know White was boring in real life. Okay, so then rewrite him and make him interesting! It would’ve been a far better move than to play a passive weasel. There is no screenplay in history led by a passive weasel that has been good.
Waaaaahoooooooo!
Greetings, you potion-brewing witches. The hour for spilling blood is upon us! I’ve done the hard work of decapitating a hundred-plus potential loglines so that only the eight best remain in the crimson-soaked moonlight. Now don your spookiest Halloween attire and choose which four loglines are your tricks, and which cherished logline is your treat.
By the way, if anyone wants to reward me for all my hard work, my favorite Halloween candy is Reeses Peanut Butter Cups. If all goes well, I will be spread eagle on the floor of my abode, too sick to move after inhaling an ungodly number of these incantations. Thank you in advance.
If my uber spooky language is too coded for you, THIS is Logline Showdown. A bunch of writers sent in their loglines. I picked the best eight. It’s now up to you to choose your favorite. Simply read all the loglines and log your vote by writing it in a comment.
If you have extra time, it’s helpful to writers if you explain why you passed over their logline, as well as why you liked the one you picked. As fun as these showdowns are, they’re ultimately about helping everyone become better writers by learning which concepts work and why.
Don’t worry if you missed this month’s showdown. We do a logline showdown every month so you can still enter in November or December. I’ll be announcing the theme of the next showdown in the newsletter which should hit your inboxes by the 27th. Just four TERRIFYING days before Halloween. If you want to get on the newsletter mailing list, send me an e-mail at Carsonreeves1@gmail.com.
Good luck to this month’s contestants. Voting closes at 11:59pm Pacific Time this Sunday night.
Title: Bacchantes
Genre: Folk Horror
Logline: Two competing brothers from a vintner lineage find themselves entrapped in a secluded vineyard. There, enigmatic women, under the guise of adoration, manipulate and intensify their rivalry, all to crown the brother who survives as the chosen vessel for Bacchus, the god of wine. Set in the misty mountains of Georgia, a country in the Caucasus.
Title: SERIAL KILLER SLUMBER PARTY
Genre: Horror
Logline: A high school outcast attending a Halloween party in a secluded mansion where the guests cosplay as history’s most notorious serial killers finds himself under attack when a real killer begins taking out the guests one by one.
Title: Sus
Genre: Thriller
Logline: A washed-up former child star who once played an iconic scream queen battles a psychopathic killer while filming Stalk Slash Repeat, a throwback horror movie intended to revive her career.
Title: Scaring Shelley
Genre: Horror
Logline: Up-and-coming, untrained actress Shelley Duvall flies to England to star in eccentric and obsessive Stanley Kubrick’s, “The Shining”. What starts as a potentially career-making role turns into a fight for sanity as a despotic Kubrick gaslights and emotionally tortures Shelley until her on-camera fear is justifiably and frighteningly real.
Title: Surrogate
Genre: Sci-Fi/Thriller
Logline: With the promise of a huge payday, a penniless woman agrees to be a surrogate mother for a renowned physician, only to discover she’s the first test subject of a diabolical medical experiment to raise the dead.
Title: Id
Genre: Horror
Logline: A burnt-out, aging novelist finds the inspiration to write again with an antique typewriter only to learn that every evil subconscious thought he writes on it comes to life.
Title: The Feast
Genre: Horror/Dark Comedy
Logline: When an orphaned social worker finally gets to meet her boyfriend’s wealthy meatpacking family at their annual reunion, she discovers that she and the other guests aren’t there for a feast, they are the feast, and must band together to try and survive the night as they’re hunted by famished vampires.
Title: LAST TO LIVE
Genre: Horror
Logline: When six influencers perform a stunt that inadvertently kills the daughter of a cartel boss, he forces them to undertake a deadly series of their own YouTube challenges. SAW meets MR BEAST
DEALS DEALS DEALS! – This weekend, I’m offering a $150 discount on both my feature script consultations and pilot script consultations. I’m also offering a 3-pack of logline consultations for just $50! If you’re interested, e-mail me at carsonreeves1@gmail.com and mention this article!
