You don’t have to read all this. I just need to get this off my chest, because it’s driving me crazy. Either there’s a handful of people targeting me who don’t understand what loglines are, or I’m missing something right in front of my face, and I don’t understand what loglines are. Let me explain. Now, from what I’ve read and been told, a logline needs three key points. 1) A basic understanding of the protagonist, 2) the protagonist’s goal and 3) what’s standing in his or her way. Is this wrong somehow? Because one of my loglines has gotten criticism for not containing things that go much deeper than the aforementioned three points. Here’s a logline for one of my scripts, called Daytime Noise: “When a hard-partying rockstar is kicked out of his band due to a drug addiction, he starts giving guitar lessons to fund his habit.” Now, in my opinion, this fulfils the three points of what’s necessary for a logline. We get an idea of the who the protagonist is. We know what his goal is: to feed his addiction. And what’s standing in his way is also his drug addiction. Anyone with a basic understanding of addiction can tell you that it’s both your highest priority and your biggest obstacle in anything you try to do. But apparently neither the goal nor the obstacle is in that logline, according to the fine people at logline.it, where I posted my logline. They also posted criticism such as “This is a situation not a story” or “This is not a plot. A plot is when critical circumstances change, forcing the character to change in some way.” Where to I even begin on these criticisms? I mean, god damn. Again, maybe I’m missing something that’s staring my right in the face. But I figured that the logline says enough about how the character would be forced to change. I mean, it’s a rich rockstar becoming a guitar teacher. Why do I have to spell out the way a person would need to change from that alteration in lifestyle? Surely the change in circumstance could tell you how a person needs to adapt? Let’s look at the Die Hard logline: “A New York City cop travels to Los Angeles to reconcile with his wife but learns she’s been taken hostage by terrorist in a skyscraper — and he struggles alone to save her.” The logline implies how the protagonist must adapt and change to overcome the situation. He has to go from average cop to hero. But apparently, people can’t understand the change of rockstar to guitar teacher, and how a person would have to adapt to that change in lifestyle? And that Die Hard logline is a “situation”. A building is taken hostage by terrorists, and the cop has to save the day. Just like my story is a situation. The rockstar is fired, and has to give guitar lessons to get drug addiction. Situations are stories to any storyteller worth their salt. I dunno. I figured that the logline was the hook. A little taste of what the story is and what it could be so that people would want to read/watch it. I don't want to give away the progression of the story and the character development of my protagonist. But according to the criticism I've received, I have to explain the protagonist, his goal, the inciting incident, the obstacles in his or her way, and the character development that must occur in order for the protagonist to reach his or her goal. I’ll say it for the third time: I could be missing something huge and fundamental here. Is my idea of what a logline should be completely missing the point? I feel like the goal and obstacle in my logline are made clear to anyone who’s able to put two and two together in relation to drug addiction. But do I actually have to spell it out? Do I have to spell it out in a medium that relies so heavily on subtext?