Flashbacks can work well in books, as well as in films (but are rarely used effectively). In The Godfather, Puzo told us of Vito's assassination attempt and the death of Santinio in flashback. I think that this is one of the book's downfalls; such incidents lose severe impact when told in flashback. I actually think that flashbacks work better in films, as then you can find out how the incident happened and then think "ah, so that's how it happened. That was clever." Do you agree? I do not know why Puzo wanted to tell the story part in flashbacks. Maybe he thought it would add more depth.

I'm very grateful that FFC decided to do away with this method! Imagine the film with Vito saying to Bonasera "look how they have massacred my boy," and then cutting to the Sonny at the causeway scene?

Mick

It wouldn't have worked well in the film, but it worked excellently in the book. Readers usually can detect when a death or something sinister will occur soon. Doing it in flashback style meant that the statement came as a sudden shock, the reader would be like "huh? what? when? how? why? er...?" and then there is plenty of time to explain how it happens. Other writers often do it normally, and it's just as effective, but when I read the Sicilian, having never seen the film, the similarly styled flashback events really worked well.

I haven't read The Sicilian so cannot comment on it. I still feel that the flashbacks could have been avoided in The Godfather and have a better effect.

Mick