Is Back to the Future II unique?

I can’t think of a single other film that takes part “within” another movie to the extent that Back to the Future II does. It’s really quite amazing how we see the events of the first film from a different perspectives (and with some changes, of course), as well as the way the audience is flat-out expected to have seen the first film (I saw it with someone who hadn’t seen the first one. It wasn’t pretty). Are there other films that are intertwined with other films to this extent?

Hamlet -> Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead

(both plays have been filmed)

It’s TV, not a movie, but what about the Deep Space Nine episode when Sisko and collegues pursued a Klingon assassin back in time to prevent the murder of Captain Kirk ? Much of the episode had them participating in the the events of the original series episode The Trouble With Tribbles.

In The Lion King 1½, Timoon & Pumbaa get to seequite a few scenes from the original movie from a different point of view.

“Command wore gold and Ops wore red.”

“And women wore LESS.” :smiley:

Worf: “We don’t discuss it with outsiders,”

There was a recent thread in which someone mentioned a trilogy(?) that describes the same events using different genres. I don’t know how intertwined the movies are. Hopefully someone can fill in the gaps.

Cavale, Un couple épatant, and Après la vie are the movies you’re referring to, panamajack

I’ve been thinking of adding them to my Netflix queue but haven’t gotten around to it. The premise and synopses sound interesting but I’m not sure I have the patience for what amounts to a six or seven hour movie at this point.

I read somewhere that Spielberg was planning on doing a movie about the Pacific war from the perspective of the U.S., then re-doing the same movie, except this time from the Japanese perspective. But I can’t remembre where I read it, or whether this is just going to be one of the plot devices in the new Pacific War miniseries (the Pacific version of “Band of Brothers”).

It’s Clint Eastwood. There was a thread about a few days ago.

Aesiron named the 3 films I cited in the other thread (though I’m not sure if Netflix will be much help; they’re great films but I’m not sure how accessible they are currently).

The 3 films have the same cast of characters, though while one will be central for one film, he may be peripheral in the next (though the varying characters have important moments of interaction with each other throughout). Actions that read one way in one film are often exposed to have very different motivations in the next. And events that we witness from one perspective (camera angle) often take a different light when seen from a different vantage point in the next film. Each film is completely self-sustaining (you’re not dependant on one to understand the other) and you can see them in whatever order, but each successive viewing adds nuance and resonance to what you’ve seen in the previous films. The action of the three films spans 4-5 days, generally speaking.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I’d give the following ratings: Cavale (On the Run): 8, Un couple épatant (An Amazing Couple): 7, Après la vie (After the Life): 10. This is the order I saw the 3 films.

Psycho, and Psycho

Not a movie or TV show, but the Heinlein books Time Enough for Love and To Sail Beyond the Sunset relate many of the same events from the points of view of two different characters.

If books count, then Ender’s Game and Ender’s Shadow.

Hey, howabout Rashomon and its other incarnations (A play was made from it after the movie. And there was a "western " version of it – The Outrage, starring Paul Newman, William Shatner, Clair Bloom, Howard da Silva, and Edward G. Robinson)

Alan Aykbourn’s The Norman Conquests trilogy are three different plays that all take place at the same dinner party, all in different rooms. They are “Table Manners” (dining room), “Living Together” (living rooms), and “Round and Round the Garden” (garden). Characters exit from one play and enter the other play as if all three were going on simultaneously. Thus, if a character leaves the living room 20 minutes into “Living Together,” he may show up 20 minutes into “Table Manners.” The three plays have been made into three TV movies.

The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek technically takes place within the movie The Great McGinty, and shows events during McGinty’s time as governor (though they weren’t in his film).

The Italian film, **The Icicle Thief (Ladri di saponette) ** is intertwined with the movie The Bicycle Thief (Ladri di Biciclette), with a few scenes from the latter in the former.

Red vs. Blue season 3.

I looked them up when they were mentioned in the other thread and Netflix has all three.

I’ve come very close to putting them on my queue a number of times but I’m just in too much of a vapid movie mood right now to concentrate on them properly.

And Piers Anthony’s Incarnations of Immortality series. I think the last one is an exception. They all pretty much run over the same ground 6 times.

Thank you. I saw these two movies in a film class when I was in school, and I seemed to be the only person who was getting the timeline. Everyone else kept insisting that McGinnity and the Boss had come back somehow. I began to wonder if I wasn’t the one getting it wrong.
One interesting point, though: Morgan’s Creek takes place in the present (at least for the viewing public it was released to), which means McGinty actually opens and closes in the future.