PSA: Plot Outlines should be concise, engaging, and readable, not overly detailed.

Through which Web browser was the message typed (or pasted) in and posted to Sprinklr?

@jeorj_euler​ I typed it up in Firefox.

What is the version of Firefox and the operating system upon which it is being run?

@jeorj_euler​ It's whatever the latest version of Firefox is, and it's running on some old laptop. I don't see what difference the operating system should make; I just opened it up on my phone (which uses Safari), and it has the same problem.

When I open the post up and look at what I typed, the spaces are in there right where they're supposed to be. It's only after posting that they disappear, which makes me think something must be wrong with the way IMDb displays the post.

@jeorj_euler​ What do you mean? Bad writing certainly seems like a problem to me.

The writing is not bad, as a matter of fact.

@jeorj_euler​

The writing is not bad, as a matter of fact.

That would be your opinion, not a "matter of fact". In my opinion, the examples I mentioned above are clear examples of bad writing.

Well, the fact of the matter is that there is nothing inaccurate, misleading, incoherent or confusing about the passages about which the complaint here is being made.

@jeorj_euler​ My complaint isn't that they are inaccurate, misleading, incoherent or confusing, my complaint is that they are overly detailed. Trying to cram excess detail into a sentence or two makes the writing less appealing and engaging. Writing can be bad or good in the same sense that a movie can be bad or good. Some movies are exciting; some are dull and tedious. The same thing goes for writing. Some writing just sucks.

A plot outline should be well-written because that's the first thing people read when they open up an IMDb page. Besides a movie poster, it's the main thing that helps viewers decide whether they're interested in the movie or not. You wouldn't judge a movie poster based solely on how "accurate" it is. It's about how well it sells the concept of the movie and gets people interested. There's a lot more to quality writing than just being accurate.

Moreover, the plot outlines I'm complaining about were already perfect before. It's the people making the changes who should be having to explain themselves and justify why they had to be altered (read: marred) in such a fashion.

@eboy​ What sort of an outline do YOU want?

@timothy_gray_el34lojg1aih1​ Me personally? It really depends on the movie.  My point (basically) was that if ten different persons write an Outline for the same movie, they’re probably all different. Sure, maybe 3-4 of these rise up from the rest, but that still leaves 3-4 different Outlines that could be considered for the ”main” one. And even after that there are people who feel that it should be better/different/more-this/more-that/less-this/less-that/better grammar/etc.

The problem with both outlines is that they're referring to an event that takes place rather late into the running time. The Godfather is a little bit tricky to summarize one short sentence. The event that really set things into motion was the Vito deciding to send Luca to infiltrate the villain's gang, after the brief meeting, set up without permission by Santino, about expanding the family's black market activity to include presence in the illegal substances market. The whole plot kind of stems from Vito being suspicious about the push to expand in such a way.

@jeorj_euler​ For the most part, I try to avoid talking about second- or third-act events in a plot outline; it's usually best to only talk about the initial setup. However, this doesn't always work. In the case of The Godfather, it's difficult to summarize the basic premise without hinting at the ultimate end that it's building towards.

Another way to think about writing plot outlines is to imagine that the movie hasn't been made yet and you're pitching the basic concept to potential backers. Plot outlines are very similar to loglines in form, if not in function. In that respect, the shorter outline (the one that starts off "The aging patriarch...") arguably fudges a little on the details, but it succeeds in summarizing the basic idea of the movie.

If someone were to think about it really hard, I suppose they could come up with a better outline than the one we currently have. For now, I'm just happy we got rid of the overly-long and clunky one that I've been ranting about.

Interestingly, a quick google search shows that the older, now-restored "aging patriarch" plot outline appears in several online lists and articles talking about how to write a great logline:

https://industrialscripts.com/famous-logline-examples/

https://kaneholder.com/blog/how-to-write-a-logline-template

https://www.inktip.com/article_single.php?a_id=240

Although some of these articles describe it as "the original logline", none of them provide evidence of this precise wording existing prior to the 2000s. It's likely that these articles were copying directly from IMDb, or from another source that copied from IMDb.

Using the Wayback Machine, we can see that this version of the plot outline first appeared on IMDb in September 2005. This version evidently had lasting appeal, as it remained unaltered on IMDb until January 2021, when some brainiac decided to change it to:

Roger that. I also apologize for being a little too dismissive when discussing this months ago. I hadn't seen the film in a long time, so wasn't thinking about how inaccurate the "however" part of the longer outline was. Mainly I recognized that it isn't too big of a deal that the names of the characters were included. For a movie with so many characters, often it is very important to match up the description of the character's part with the shortest variant of his or her name. So, for instance, the following would be fairly suitable: "Vito, the aging patriarch of an organized crime dynasty, transfers control of his clandestine empire to his reluctant son Michael."

It's not necessarily bad to have names in the plot outline. Heck, even the one for The Big Lebowski that I cited as an example of a great plot outline starts off by giving the main character's name. In that case, his name is actually a part of the plot, so I think it's appropriate to give his name in the outline. It would probably be more awkward trying to avoid mentioning names in that example.

I also think it's perfectly fine to use names in sequels, especially for long-running series, to avoid having to describe the character anew every single time. It's perfectly fine to write something like, "Batman and Superman must team up to defeat a new enemy" or something like that. Everyone reading is likely familiar with Batman and Superman, but might not know about the new villain. Using their names actually makes the writing less overelaborate, which is good for readability.

Suffice it to say, I'm not against using names per se, I just think that as a general rule, if one can avoid adding more words to the plot outline, they should err in that direction. In the case of The Godfather, I think it was clear enough without the names, which is why I disapproved of the change.

@Michelle​

Thanks for taking my thoughts into consideration. I realize this issue is sort of a gray area - a plot outline can't be wrong in the same way as an incorrect credit or release date or something like that; nevertheless, I feel it is important to maintain high standards of quality when it comes to plot outlines, since they play such a prominent role.

I too just re-watched it recently. Good point about the danger existing prior to Michael saving Vito's life.