A desperate CEO’s legally ambiguous plans to save his company are undermined when he is blackmailed by a mysterious ex-employee.
Overall, it relates the story. However, and this is just me, I would drop the word “legally.” To me, this would add a sense that your main character walks a line trying to save the company, which gives support to the blackmail. The story should bare out the legalities of the plan, and if the blackmailer is just or not. Just my thoughts Stevey. From the logline, the story sound tense.
I wanted to comment because I really like this logline and the sense of the tension in this movie. I can see the others’ comments are phenomenal. My two cents is that CEOs can range from multi-billion dollar corporations to work-from-home operations. Corporations grow, flounder, fail, hold steady, innovate, or whatever. Usually when we think of CEOs we think of the rich and powerful, but that’s not always the case. I’m not sure I would use “benevolent” to describe the company as much as I would indicate the size or scope of the company: global, Fortune 500, up-n-coming, for example because each category of corporation conjures a different sense of conflict. An old, rich, powerful CEO functions differently than a from-the-ground-up entrepreneurial hot shot. I just craved a little more detail in that sense. I would also consider naming the industry if it has any relation to the story or characters.