is it necessary

You wouldn't be lost, but if you watch The Hustler, you'll probably be disappointed with The Color of Money.

I saw the Evil Dead trilogy last to first, and have never regretted it for a second. Concerning "Color of Money", I viewed that film maybe four or five times, growing up, before seeing "The Hustler". You should be fine either way. Aside from subject matter and presence of Paul/Eddie, they are totally different films. The first is slow and intense with little if any music, while the sequel, in typical Scorsese fashion, is quick, stylish, and full of snappy dialogue, set to a clever barrage of rock goodies.


"The key is, you've got to be crazy to maintain your sanity"

IMHO, you won't be lost "plot wise". But you won't get the same psychological depth, and angles that are in "Fast Eddie". I also think that you might get lost as to what this movie is "really about", as I've noticed with the comments of different threads.

I watched The Color of Money when I was in high school and didn't see The Hustler until some time later in life. I didn't need to see The Hustler to understand and enjoy The Color of Money, BUT, after having watched The Hustler there were things in The Color of Money that made more sense. I would say watch The Hustler first, it will only make The Color of Money more enjoyable. As for comparing the two films, it's tempting, but try not to, they're not the same movie and should be judged on their own merits, not against each other.