Quoted from Andrew I'd say that producers are not scared of changing things around to suit requirements if the logline is compelling. If they stop reading based on the note, would they have really read it anyway? Not too sure they would've.

Every producer I've run into has their desires/needs for a script.
And in lieu of all that, they're all looking for an engaging story.
Something that excites them, something they can sell.
These are questions they're going to ask if they're into the script anyway.

Loglines are about enticement, not production parameters.

I've learned when someone you don't know is looking at your work...
Adhere to industry standard practices so they think you're NOT an amateur.

Plus, there are ways to work some, if not most, of that info into a logline...

"A polygraph expert tests an evasive witness."

It suggests, one room, two people in the actual logline. This one too...

"A customer haggles with a clerk over store policy."

I've gotten lots of requests for those scripts based on those points.
Producers immediately caught on they are limited location short scripts.
So, why not just focus on improving loglines to suggest production details?

My two cents.

Regards,
E.D.

Quoted Text Every producer I've run into has their desires/needs for a script. And in lieu of all that, they're all looking for an engaging story. Something that excites them, something they can sell. These are questions they're going to ask if they're into the script anyway. Loglines are about enticement, not production parameters. I've learned when someone you don't know is looking at your work... Adhere to industry standard practices so they think you're NOT an amateur. Plus, there are ways to work some, if not most, of that info into a logline... "A polygraph expert tests an evasive witness." It suggests, one room, two people in the actual logline. This one too... "A customer haggles with a clerk over store policy." I've gotten lots of requests for those scripts based on those points. Producers immediately caught on they are limited location short scripts. So, why not just focus on improving loglines to suggest production details? My two cents. Regards, E.D.

I get ya. I do agree re: writing your logline with a strong pointer towards cast/location count if it's a budget conscious production. Obviously Mark and Jeff are correct in saying this shouldn't be the way, but moviemaking is a business, and it has to pay the bills, so you have to reconcile that fundamental requirement with artistic goals. The Weinsteins, and increasingly Rudin, are able to do this extremely well.

My two pence (!): I'm not advocating everyone inserts a producer's note addendum upon this discussion, but rather that it's a useful tool should you so choose. I certainly wouldn't envisage it being done en masse, but if you want to, then drop it in the Other Comments section when submitting and it's fine. It doesn't reek of unprofessionalism, IMO. It's pragmatic in this setting and for all its evident plus points, SS is not a microcosm of Hollywood. No site can be.

Yeah, it's fine to adopt industry standards so they become second nature (and I agree that's good practice and much of what the recent thread debating script bashing concerned) but amongst a plethora of scripts, such a measure could be a tactical manoeuvre that interests a filmmaker. Judging by the thread querying 'what interests producers', this could be an adroit means of standing out. Key being it's up to the writer if they want to do it.

Quoted from Andrew My two pence (!): I'm not advocating everyone inserts a producer's note addendum upon this discussion, but rather that it's a useful tool should you so choose.

Yay for tools!
Us outsider types need everything we can to make our toolbox rock.
Agreed, it's one of those case by case things.

Regards,
E.D.

Producers don't look for scripts based entirely on actors or locations. They care about a good story. But try putting together a film budget sometime. Costs are an important part of filmmaking. These are things every producer has to consider. It’s their job.

Brett has the right idea. If at all possible, you should infer it in the logline. That said, I don’t have a problem with stating it in the logline and I don’t think most filmmakers would either. I wouldn’t go so far as to specify gender unless it was relevant. But I don’t think stating the cast size or the number of locations is that big of a deal.

Most filmmakers who are looking for shorts are only looking for single location scripts anyway. You’re just saving them time. They might appreciate it.


Breanne


Addendum -- I’m speaking about shorts and independent filmmakers here.

I really think you should clarify this whole discussion by calling it something other than a log line if you include this additional information - something like mini-pitch.  

I'm fairly certain that if you entered a log line with production information into any log line contest, the response would be WTF.  It wouldn't belong there.

That isn't to say it wouldn't be helpful to include this information in a pitch for shorts and independent filmmakers (as Breanne mentions above) -- or even if you're pitching to an agent (but don't refer to it as a log line).  I don't totally dislike the idea.   I just think you should be very careful about what you're calling it and where and when you use it.    

My two cents about the importance of the Log line and whether to include actor names in it with locations or not?

ANS: (This might not be the best, but I am trying here):
Log line is like your shining shoe, when you get into a party where people are both 'predators' and 'victims' that led to a previous success or failure story in their film careers. When you are pitching a story to a Producer "Just tell the story about the PERSON", you see the story from inside. Like JAKE SULLY in Avtar, BRAVEHEART (Mel Gibson's character), 'Untouchables' through the eyes of Elliot Ness, and so on. Being specific like that keeps the reader or the producer on track with your thought process, which is already going on multifarious dimensions.

Usually, the name of the actor in the log line then is either a limitation for the producer who might NOT have the resources to reach or attach such an actor, / might not simply have a "Likable" vibe between them, causing more hurt to your project than help -- or it might be a gain, depending on who the producer is. Agents are smarter in most cases and they don't waste their / our time -- listening to 'boring' stories and call a "Spade a spade" inside 30 seconds.

LOCATIONS: These days, with the GREEN Screen, there are no limitations as far as locations are concerned. Many things are not how we see them on screen. It seems the biggest revenue earner 'Avengers' -- has a scene about India, supposedly a slum in Kolkatta which was filmed in Albuquerque or somewhere around there in New Mexico.

The log line should be subtle, succinct and hard hitting, the synopsis can have an actor suggestion. The locations don't matter. Unless, they are "Historically accurate to be" films or Biopics.

Quoted from jagan@spundana.org LOCATIONS: These days, with the GREEN Screen, there are no limitations as far as locations are concerned.

Chroma key compositing definitely has limitations. At least, for low budget films it does. Green screen isn’t a fix-all for location issues. For one, to be done properly, it’s not as cheap - or as easy - as you think. And it can be prohibitively expensive.

I see lead after lead after lead from low budget filmmakers looking for scripts that are set in a limited number of locations. You telling them location doesn’t matter because of green screen will only make you look like a complete amateur.

Even in a big budget Hollywood production where the locations are added in post, someone still has to create the background and make it move with the action. That isn’t cheap.

I did a green screen shot in my short film and it took thirteen takes just to get that one shot. Then I could only play with it so much in post because the costs would have skyrocketed. Matching action took editing time. Then there’s matte line removal and color correction to make it match. I’m not totally happy with the way it turned out, but I couldn’t spend my whole budget on one 4 second shot.

Most low budget filmmakers want to avoid green screen because they know it can eat up their budget. That is, if you want to do it right.

Quoted from jagan@spundana.org The locations don't matter. Unless, they are "Historically accurate to be" films or Biopics.

I’ll be the first to admit my experience is limited. But one thing I’ve learned is that location most definitely does matter.

I might ignore budget if I’m writing something I want to sell in Hollywood or use for a sample, but there’s no question that the likelihood of getting produced is inverse to the size of the budget. Even with Hollywood, you have better odds of getting produced with a medium to low budget script. Hollywood is looking for the next Buried from a new writer, not the next Avengers.


Breanne