Single father and cat burglar Greg Valdez steals an ancient artifact and must outwit a 700-year-old madman to save the life of his son.
When does the son need saving? Before or after the father steals the artifact.
In other words, does the father steal the artifact as part of a plan to save the son?
Or does stealing the artifact set in motion a series of events that leads to the son needing to be saved? This isn’t clear from the logline.
Also, The first line needs re-written. When I first read the line, I thought you were talking about two different people, not one. In other words, it reads like: Single father (Character number one) and cat burglar Greg Valdez (Character number two) steal an ancient artifact…
However, with a few simple word changes, it is a simple fix.
Usage of the word “ancient artifact” with “700-year-old madman” makes me want to guess “stealing the artifact” will lead to “the son needs saving”. As Richiev pointed out, it requires guesswork. My issue is: Since he stole it, why is the madman targeting his son?
It also needs clarity with what’s stopping the father from killing this-very old-madman?, for us to map the urgency of his situation; to better imagine his Goal.
PS. Drop “Greg Valdez”, unless it’s historically relevant, or an IP.
Yep, don’t leave readers guessing, having to read twice, three times to figure out what the story is. A logline has one window of opportunity, 10-12 seconds, to pitch the plot, set the story hook. There are no second chances. A reader must immediately grasp what the story is about , immediately get hooked.
An additional challenge in this logline is that the protagonist is a thief. We may sympathize with his son for being an innocent victim. But it will be hard to sympathize with the protagonist; the dramatic predicament is his fault. His action has caused the fecal fury that is inflicted upon his son.