I know, I know, just as things calm down following the thread that not speak it's name, or as i fondly put it, The Cathartic Purge, i'm going to ask a questions thats going to cause a dispute. I can feel it in my waters!!

Ok, what is it?

Well, i was interested by the comment of Mr Zack Van Eyck, who recently made an appearance, about why he puts the actor and location information in an expanded logline. To quote he says;

The list of characters and locations is something I always include as part of the expanded logline.  Producers don't have time to read through a script to see if there might be a role for the actors they have in mind.  And they often have budget restraints or limited location availability.  They need to know right away if the script fits those requirements.  So I always include this information when I send or list a script somewhere where  a producer might come across it.  It's simply to help facilitate the potential sale of the script.

So, my dear friends, should we not consider this? Personally, i find this argument quite strong, IF you want your script to be picked up.

Now, so far, my scripts have little producer appeal as they are expensive and difficult. So, i don't think i would put this information in for them (maybe True Myth could pass) as for Falling Angels i would need a bomber squadron and a Cathedral to blow up!

However, i have a script in progress which is two people, largely one room. I think that is a selling point in terms of cost and accessibility and i would like to promote that fact.

Ok, enough of my rambling, what does everyone think?

cheers

(PS - if you do want to promote your work, and this helps, does it matter that a normal practice is
not adhered to and a few writers pass comment?)

I think as a writer you can convey the requirements in a logline as opposed to saying it.

My thoughts
Gabe

I personally think it's helpful.

In the past I've even suggested having a separate synopsis listing...so I can just skim read what the story is.

There appear to be an increasing number of serious people circling...anything that helps them can't hurt I would say.

I can see his point.

But I personally would not do it because I think it looks silly and pretentious.  (Though I reserve my right to change my mind in a few years when everybody starts doing it... )

In the big picture you either have a good script or you don't -- so this particular quirk probably matters quite little.

I think if you're pimping the script to an agent and you think that will get you the sale you want then go for it.  However, I think that sort of informal banter about your script is more appropriate for a spoken pitch than a written pitch.  But if it works for you then it works. There is one thing I can say with certainty and that is it is not appropriate to include such information in your log line if you are looking for criticism on a screenwriting site.    

Quoted from reef dreamer who quoted Zack Van Eyck in the first place. Producers don't have time to read through a script

Hey guys.  Just wanted to let you know I'm one step closer to finding out why movies have been so shitty lately.  I'll keep you posted on any further findings.

- Mark

"In the universe, there's law and order, and everything has its rightful place."

To each his own...  but I would never do anything like that.


Ghostie

I'm with Ghostwriter on this one. I see no reason to make a logline any longer than it has to be. To me, a logline is basically a formal tagline. It should be as short as possible, while still getting across the info it has to.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films In the past I've even suggested having a separate synopsis listing...so I can just skim read what the story is.

I like this idea; something separate to the logline.  And the actor/location info could be included with this as well.  Would definitely be helpful to those seeking scripts for production.

Hey Reef,

I see where you're coming from, but for me, keeping options open is king.
Right next to story, of course.  
I don't want to pigeon hole someone if the story grabs them.

If someone loved the Lie Detector logline...
But was discouraged over the all male cast listing.
I could dissuade them right there from contacting me.
It could come off as pretentious or signal to them I'm not open to changes.
They may have a female action vehicle agenda in mind.  

So why confine the casting parameters?
If Gina Carano's people looked at Lie Detector and got excited...
You better believe when they call, I'll change Carson to Carla in a heartbeat!

Regards,
E.D.

Thanks everyone, hopefully we can have a useful debate on this.

First off i should have clarified the only reason for putting this information into an extended logline is because there is nowhere else on SS for this, as far as i know.

Even at MP there are sections for genre, cast size, production availability.

Not all scripts are here for promoting, but many are and that's a good aspect of SS. Why not make it more producer friendly?

If i may say, there does to appear a little difference between producers and writers, which i can understand.

Having read the replies and pondered this a bit more, i still like the idea. I can't see why, if put sensibly, any reader would be affected when reviewing the script.

An example of what i mean would be;

TRUE MYTH - When a secret military department is given the power of psychic foresight, they must quickly use this to avert an impending disaster. (Producer note; slapstick/spoof comedy, depending on structure/alterations would require  one or two locations and between four and seven actors)

Ok, not likely to be produced but an example.

Any harm in doing this?

I recall Rick mentioning this before.

It would surely do no harm to have some casting/location 'suggestions for producers.

Something like:

SIMPLY SCRIPTS MOVIE: Standard logline here.

Producer's note: Then a little about casting/location here.

Quoted Text Hey Reef, I see where you're coming from, but for me, keeping options open is king. Right next to story, of course.   I don't want to pigeon hole someone if the story grabs them. If someone loved the Lie Detector logline... But was discouraged over the all male cast listing. I could dissuade them right there from contacting me. It could come off as pretentious or signal to them I'm not open to changes. They may have a female action vehicle agenda in mind.   So why confine the casting parameters? If Gina Carano's people looked at Lie Detector and got excited... You better believe when they call, I'll change Carson to Carla in a heartbeat! Regards, E.D.

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.

Quoted from Reef Dreamer TRUE MYTH - When a secret military department is given the power of psychic foresight, they must quickly use this to avert an impending disaster. (Producer note; slapstick/spoof comedy, depending on structure/alterations would require  one or two locations and between four and seven actors) Any harm in doing this?

To me, you seem to be confusing a log line and a pitch.  There is no harm in providing that information in a pitch.  However, it seems out of place to include that information if you call it a log line.  I know it's sort of just semantics but I think most anyone will agree with the last statement.

When I first read this, I didn't understand. I thought you meant literally in the logline. But you mean just including it in the SS space available to logline. That seems like a good idea.

One option is to do what I did with Tap. I gave Don 2 links: one for the script, one for a 1 page pitch sheet. On the pitch sheet, I have the log, a brief pitch, and brief synopsis. I actually did not think to put down characters or production information, but you could easily put it there. I have no idea how many people click that link, maybe no one. There are no stats on it.

Quoted from rc1107 Hey guys.  Just wanted to let you know I'm one step closer to finding out why movies have been so shitty lately.  I'll keep you posted on any further findings.

I'll second and third this, Mark.  Well put...and so true.

To think that a "producer" would choose a script based on location and actors, and not even care if it's good or well written, or...oh fuck it.  I don't want to get started again.

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