Problem that most people want the logline to be *short*, one or two sentences at most, and while it's possible to give a sense of the story in that logline, there's no way to give a sense of the look or tone. For example, the Matrix had the logline: : "A computer hacker learns from mysterious rebels about the true nature of his reality and his role in the war against the controllers of it." Fair enough, right? Gives you what the story is about, but nothing about the visual aspect of the movie. But if you then add, "It's a live action version of Ghost in the Shell", well now between them, you've described in broad terms everything about that movie.

Newest Information of Online Movie Release Release KT

I agree Scott. I think the mash-ups are better during a face-to-face pitches. It should be thought of as the "icing on the cake".

The thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that by doing the mash-up you risk rejection based on other properties/ideas. Suppose an exec doesn't like/hates Michael Douglas in "Falling Down" (not me, I think he's great), they may reject your script "Scorpio Cruise" based on that, which really has nothing to do with your logline or story. Another issue is "Taken" is so much more recent--just under 4 years ago--while "Falling Down" is coming up on 20th anniversary. A new exec may not see that as a good thing, they may not even know what "Falling Down" is and that'll kill their interest. They may see it as an old, recyled script and no longer fresh. So many reactions possible that can all lead to bad. Sure, they may be fans of the two movies you mash-up, but then their expectations may be too high or unrealistic and what if your script doesn't meet that? What if you picked a mash-up for story but they think it was star quality? Mash-ups are a can of worms. Let your own words sell your words. I agree with Scott and Earl, mash-ups for the hip pocket and face-to-face, not in writing.

januaryfire, that point is totally spot-on. Either or both of the titles in your mash-up may provoke a negative connotation for the person to whom you are pitching your story. People have associations with movies. If those associations are negative, then the mash-up is actually working against you. Really important observation, jf, and thanks for posting it.

I don't know Scott... while you're absolutely right about the need to be judicious when using the mash-up, ultimately there's a choice to be made between delivering the movie you want made vs the one the studio wants to make. Given that movies are a *visual* medium, and that as screenwriters we're actually supposed to be creating the blueprint for a movie, and not just something to be read, in my mind, the mash-up is far more powerful in establishing the tone than the logline is. As far as I can tell, the #1 or #2 complaint from pro screenwriters (along with being rewritten) is precisely that the studio isn't making the movie they wrote. Consequently, don't you owe it to yourself as a screenwriter to be completely upfront about your vision for the movie, and therefore try to describe the tone of the movie as accurately as possible? Or does the need to sell a screenplay trump all other considerations?

Pliny, absolutely a writer should hope to have those type of discussions about tone, style, feel, atmosphere, themes and all the rest with producers, studio execs, director, etc. The specific issue per the question was whether to use a title mash-up for a writer querying someone for possible representation. Basically I advise no. However, as noted, it certainly doesn't hurt to have that mash-up in your hip pocket for subsequent meetings.

I agree with pliny. Why try to keep it a secret? If your movie really is a Casablanca story with a Matrix feel, eventually, that cat's gonna come out of the bag. I get that the logline itself is primary, but personally feel that mashups are a great shorthand. I think one of the reasons people are predisposed to dislike them is they've become a cliche in and of themselves -- the cheapest and easiest joke you can make about Hollywood, even surpassing the old "I'll have my people call your people" saw. But, if done right and seriously, I think a mash-up is one of the quickest ways to say a lot about the film you set out to write. For instance -- "It has the gore of Hostel, but with a more serious, Silence of the Lambs mystery at its core." I dunno. To me, that says something.

fair enough, I wasn't making the distinction.

Sorry, I'm just really anti-mash-up. It seems like a crutch to me. I think there is a big difference in selling an idea to the money people/distributor to and getting a producer/director/agent/manager to read your script. Financing needs a bottom line and the mash-up is perfect for that. But for the creative side, I think you really need to craft your own logline. If you can't tell your story/concept in your own words in one sentence, why should the reader think you can write a whole script worth reading? Yes, tone is extremely important, but a writer should be able to convey that in their logline to get a read. When it comes to marketing the finished film, a mash-up can help the ad people target the market, it can help in positioning the campaign and conveying the story to the consumer. A mash-up can certainly help in the early stages of writing as a conceptual tool for focus on the final script. I can see the usefulness of a mash-up in conversation, like a pitchfest or a chance meeting with an agent where you only have miliseconds to pique their interest. But in an email, there's a slightly longer moment, time for a fuller version of the story. What Annika's mash-up does is give tone and visuals but doesn't give the story. I want the story/concept in the logline, tone if it can be integrated well. The mash-up, in general, seems like more of a follow-up comment after the real logline is presented. However, if you tell me a logline, I'll probably make my own mental connections to other movies/tv.

@januaryfire, I didn't read any rule that said an email query could only be one sentence, which is why I wrote that "the logline itself is primary". It would be stupid to simply send out a mash-up. That's why, if I had a great tone-setting mash-up, I'd do my bang-up logline first, THEN follow with the mash-up. I might even be crazy and throw another line in there in the middle. You can do a two or three line email, and if people start saying there's a rule against that, we're all in big trouble because this will officially be the most creatively stifling industry in existence.