Comparing opening techniques between movies and stories is like comparing apples to oranges, movies have the benefit of providing visuals and other sounds, writing is a lot more limited. The mediums are too different to really compare.
That's why I said dialogue against a black screen that's transitioning into a scene. As the viewer, all you hear are voices of characters you don't know, in an unfamiliar setting, if only for a few seconds or a couple lines.
You compare this to a novel opening up with a few lines exchanged between two or more characters you don't know. What their conversation is based on can set the stage for the entire story. This might take a page to convey whereas a film can accomplish this in the first 5-10 seconds.
In both media, I'm here looking for a story. If the novel opens up with dialogue, that's like me eavesdropping on a conversation. If what the characters are discussing grabs my attention, then we have a winner, much like if the author decided to open up with interesting details covering X character in Y setting.
Had
The Godfather novel opened up in a similar way to how its film version started, I don't think the author would've lost me then and there.
A:
"I believe in America. America has made my fortune. And I raised my daughter in the American fashion. I gave her freedom, but I taught her never to dishonor her family. She found a boyfriend; not an Italian. She went to the movies with him; she stayed out late. I didn't protest. Two months ago, he took her for a drive, with another boyfriend. They made her drink whiskey. And then they tried to take advantage of her. She resisted. She kept her honor. So they beat her, like an animal..."
Let's just say this "pretend" novel started that way with no other description. No context. Just someone rambling.
We have no idea who the guy is. Who don't know if he's talking to himself or another person. Coincidentally, this is how the film portrayed the scene. The man is just talking, but we have no idea who he is, where he is, etc.
He continues, and someone else follows up with:
B:
"Why did you go to the police? Why didn't you come to me first?"
A:
"What do you want of me? Tell me anything. But do what I beg you to do."
With only these lines opening up this "pretend" novel, the reader knows the following now:
1. Person A has experienced something quite terrible. His daughter was assaulted.
2. Person B is listening to this story, much like we are, but Person B knows what's going on.
3. Person A is seeking Person B's help.
I'm okay with this. This is a strange situation and I want to know a little more. The author got me and now the novel can start working in character descriptions, their existing roles, show some body language... which is indeed what follows, as Person A, Amerigo Bonasera, approaches Person B, Don Corleone, and whispers a request in his ear. This is particularly powerful because now the reader has no idea what was said and this is immediately followed by Corleone saying:
"What is that? That I cannot do."
Again, let's just go back and pretend this is how
The Godfather novel opened up, rather than with:
"
Amerigo Bonasera sat in New York Criminal Court Number 3 and waited for justice; vengeance on the men who had so cruelly hurt his daughter, who had tried to dishonor her. The judge, a formidably heavy-featured man, rolled up the sleeves of his black robe as if to physically chastise the two young men standing before the bench. His face was cold with majestic contempt. But there was something false in all this that Amerigo Bonasera sensed but did not yet understand."
The hook is very similar and invokes similar wonder in the reader. Just like if the novel opened with dialogue, this opening line and subsequent ones tell the reader the following:
1. Bonasera has experienced something quite terrible. His daughter was assaulted.
2. Bonasera is seeking help.
3. Bonasera suspects something odd about what's to come.
So for the real novel, this scene then goes on to briefly cover Bonasera's circumstance as a law-abiding Italian-immigrant who has found his footing in America. After a couple other scenes (introducing several other key characters, including Corleone), the reader won't meet Bonasera again until roughly page 30ish where we get the scene from the movie and its opening dialogue.
What the writer could have done in the "pretend" version is open with the dialogue and then dive into a brief review of Bonasera's circumstances, just like the real novel. The film's dialogue does mention Bonasera's trip to court, how justice was not served, which led to Bonasera's seeking out Corleone.
So now we have flashback material here. Love it or hate it, writers use it. So the "pretend" version could easily go right into how the real novel structured its opening and then rearranged how other characters are introduced to the reader.
I went on much longer than I expected. I just wanted to compare traditional writing with movie writing and how one medium can translate into another. It really just depends on how it's done. Whether one is better than another is subjective.
The targeted demographic definitely makes a difference, too.
And this is very true. Curiosity in yuppies is definitely not the same as curiosity in children or curiosity in adults on the brink of their midlife crises.