Logline Central - Reply All

Logline Central is an irregular segment that takes a deeper look at loglines of scripts or projects that have just been purchased, as listed on DoneDealPro.

Sometimes, it's hard to tell whether something's original or not (i.e. not a prequel, sequel, adaptation, or re-make). The word "pitch" can be a good indicator at times. The word "spec" is a dead give-away. But if neither of those are there? If "remake," "adaptation," "prequel," or "sequel" aren't there either? Look at the idea, the context, the additional information, and make an educated guess. This, to me, looks like an original comedy being set up, and at a time when original material is rare, that's always a good thing.

Title: Reply All

Logline: A guy hits the "reply all" button to an indiscreet e-mail, and then has to deal with the repercussions.

Writer: Phil Johnston

Genre: Comedy

More: Zach Galifianakis will produce. Phil Johnston will executive produce. Galifianakis will also star. 

I guess it's about time that the "reply all" - that often dreaded button - was the source of cinematic comedy. We've all accidentally hit it, or at least worried about hitting it. And comedy seems like an appropriate genre for dealing with this office mishap. I wonder a bit what the script is like; in a way, it has a HANGOVER vibe to me (and not just because Zach Galifianakis is involved). Guy does something he doesn't mean to do, has to spend the next day trying to make up for it and apologizing to everyone involved. Kind of makes you wonder what the content of that email is - Phil Johnston's going to have to be pretty sharp to set that up. The one thing about the logline I'm not sure about is the word "indiscreet" - maybe that's just me, but it seems like one of those instances where word choice can lead the reader in an odd direction. "Indiscreet" could somehow imply that he doesn't know the characters involved, or that the information in the email was cryptic enough to not allow for much trouble. If I were a production exec, I'd definitely be interested enough in the idea, but the word "indiscreet" gets me thinking in a way that the writer might have wanted to avoid.

Still, Phil Johnston has some notches in his comedy headboard. While I haven't seen anything he's credited on on Imdb, his upcoming CEDAR RAPIDS has comedy strongmen John C. Reilly, Ed Helms, and Rob Corddry, among other notables. That could be one to watch out for, too. Obviously, with those guys involved and production (apparently) completed, and now this sale, Johnston is doing something right. It might be hard to get original dramas off the ground these days, but it seems that comedies still offer opportunities.

The Hangover: Ahh, the Dangers of Alcohol

I was pretty excited to see The Hangover. I am a twenty-four year old male, who enjoys drinking and has experienced more black-outs than I’m proud of. The day after a black-out includes me sheepishly calling a friend, recounting my few memories, and subtly trying to inquire about my post-blackout actions. Then, after the initial laughter, I am forced to reconcile said actions with who I am as a person. This movie was made for guys like me.

It's not uncommon for guys to take their buddies to Vegas for a last hurrah, drink too much, and do stupid things they don’t remember…stupid, meaning, going $400 over budget or getting thrown out of a casino. What the fine gentlemen in The Hangover get into is beyond surreal. Their night begins innocently enough with three friends (Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis) toasting their soon-to-be buddy Justin (Doug Billings) atop a Vegas rooftop. And then…they wake up. They can’t remember a thing, but with the room trashed, they guess they had a good time. Until they discover the groom is missing.

This begins the arduous process of piecing together the previous night which includes – but is not limited to – the following discoveries: a bed atop a Vegas hotel; a baby in their hotel room; a tiger belonging to Mike Tyson; a missing tooth; a valet ticket which gets them a police car instead of their convertible; a Chinese gangster inside said convertible. Though incredibly random, the movie is able to make it work within a logical timeline (which is the only logic necessary, given that most drunken behavior is illogical).

And yet, I left the theatre pretty under whelmed. It’s a pretty basic story, held above water by the reveals and the jokes that go along with them. I feel like most of the action in the now was not spent paving over the previous nights' events, and that we were treated to a slew of characters saying variations of, "Oh, you don't remember what happened? Oh, you were so wasted..." I didn’t love the cast, nor did I feel that they would have actually been friends (Galifianakis is a HUGE exception; everything he says is gold). And the Chinese gangster bit, though initially funny, gets tiresome.

I still liked it, in that I can remember and laugh at certain jokes and moments. But I definitely expected more. If we judge the movie from the box office, it was insanely successful. I don’t know…maybe after X years of drinking, I’m a bit desensitized to this sort of stuff?


(PS - Sit through the credits)