This is a more elaborate, lavish and altogether satisfactory version of the above, with Conrad Veidt perfectly cast in the lead and with Werner Krauss also making for a menacing Scapinelli. The expressionistic elements are well in evidence here (director Henrik Galeen had written Murnau's NOSFERATU [1922] and, stylistically, the film does bear some resemblance to it): while not quite reaching the heights of, say, THE CABINET OF DR. CALIGARI (1919) and NOSFERATU itself, it's very much deserving of the reputation it enjoys in the horror film genre and, despite the shoddy print quality of the Alpha DVD, replete with missing frames (where are Kino when you need them?), I'm truly glad I was given an opportunity to watch this elusive classic from the Silent era after having read so much about it since childhood! Let's hope now that another highly-regarded (and much-filmed) Conrad Veidt vehicle, THE HANDS OF ORLAC (1925), also gets a DVD release soon...
14 Reviews
Haunting
TheLittleSongbird9 July 2020
Conrad Veidt was a great actor who we lost far too young, have loved them ever since being captivated by his Jaffar in one of my favourites 'The Thief of Baghdad'. There are many classic silent films, such as the best of FW Murnau, Fritz Lang, Abel Gance, DW Griffith and GW Pabst. The story, which reminded me a lot of Goethe's 'Faust', sounded really interesting and the expressionistic visual style has been done so well many times.
'The Student of Prague' deserves a lot more credit than it gets at the moment. It is not one of my favourites and is not quite perfect, but there are so many good, brilliant even, things that made 'The Student of Prague' a very memorable experience for me. Not quite among the best of my recent first time viewings, but one of the most interesting and most unique because of its visuals and atmosphere. Anybody who hasn't seen it yet and has an interest to, definitely do so.
Don't know where to start with the praise, but will start with the visuals. Visually and technically, 'The Student of Prague' is another silent film to be a triumph. The sets are elaborate and hauntingly expressionistic, the effects are generally remarkably accomplished (occasionally showing their age though) and the lighting has a real eeriness, but the standout is for me some of the best cinematography for any film of the late 20s. It is the complete opposite of static and is actually wildly imaginative. Making for some memorable images, like Scapanelli on the mountaintop, the snatching of the love letter with great use of shadow and the rescue scene. The music may not be one of the most inspired or memorable music scores in the world, but it at least is not discordant with what happens and has an unsettlement.
Although the story is imperfect in terms of pacing, it just captivates atmosphere-wise. There is a genuine creepiness and the confrontations leaves one glued to the edge of the seat. The dramatic highlight is the final confrontation, which is nothing short of hair-raising. Both Balduin and especially Scapinelli are fascinating characters and the chemistry between Balduin and the reflection is immediately intriguing and stays that way throughout. Veidt is very dashing and charismatic but also chilling when necessary. Werner Krauss is every bit as good and while he has fun as Scapinelli he also sends shivers down the spine. The film is superbly directed, especially in the final confrontation.
It's not perfect but actually doesn't have an awful lot wrong with it. It's flawed pace-wise, with some draggy scenes. Such as a party scene that is overlong and adds nothing.
Elizza La Porta is charming enough but her character isn't as meaty and she doesn't have the same amount of charisma that Veidt and Krauss do. As a few have said, the print is pretty shoddy but not enough to render 'The Student of Prague' unwatchable.
On the whole, very good and deserves more credit. 8/10
'The Student of Prague' deserves a lot more credit than it gets at the moment. It is not one of my favourites and is not quite perfect, but there are so many good, brilliant even, things that made 'The Student of Prague' a very memorable experience for me. Not quite among the best of my recent first time viewings, but one of the most interesting and most unique because of its visuals and atmosphere. Anybody who hasn't seen it yet and has an interest to, definitely do so.
Don't know where to start with the praise, but will start with the visuals. Visually and technically, 'The Student of Prague' is another silent film to be a triumph. The sets are elaborate and hauntingly expressionistic, the effects are generally remarkably accomplished (occasionally showing their age though) and the lighting has a real eeriness, but the standout is for me some of the best cinematography for any film of the late 20s. It is the complete opposite of static and is actually wildly imaginative. Making for some memorable images, like Scapanelli on the mountaintop, the snatching of the love letter with great use of shadow and the rescue scene. The music may not be one of the most inspired or memorable music scores in the world, but it at least is not discordant with what happens and has an unsettlement.
Although the story is imperfect in terms of pacing, it just captivates atmosphere-wise. There is a genuine creepiness and the confrontations leaves one glued to the edge of the seat. The dramatic highlight is the final confrontation, which is nothing short of hair-raising. Both Balduin and especially Scapinelli are fascinating characters and the chemistry between Balduin and the reflection is immediately intriguing and stays that way throughout. Veidt is very dashing and charismatic but also chilling when necessary. Werner Krauss is every bit as good and while he has fun as Scapinelli he also sends shivers down the spine. The film is superbly directed, especially in the final confrontation.
It's not perfect but actually doesn't have an awful lot wrong with it. It's flawed pace-wise, with some draggy scenes. Such as a party scene that is overlong and adds nothing.
Elizza La Porta is charming enough but her character isn't as meaty and she doesn't have the same amount of charisma that Veidt and Krauss do. As a few have said, the print is pretty shoddy but not enough to render 'The Student of Prague' unwatchable.
On the whole, very good and deserves more credit. 8/10
good Faustian silent, with some striking scenes amidst some tedium
FieCrier4 June 2005
I watched Alpha Video's cheap DVD of this. It lacks the original title and inter titles, though some easy to read new inter titles have been added. The musical score is unremarkable, and while called original by the DVD box, seems "canned." Balduin is a poor student, but a great fencer. Apart from that, we don't learn very much about him or what he wants. He is, however, humiliated by his poverty. He wishes perhaps a rich heiress would marry him.
A mephistophelian character named Scarpinetti offers to deliver on that, and in one scene dramatically stands atop a windy hill by a fallen tree gesturing towards a hunting party. They seem to follow his directions, which leads to a rich heiress having trouble with her horse near Balduin, who rescues her.
However, this is just a tease from Scarpinetti. Balduin goes to visit the woman later, taking with him a flower from a poor flower girl (who seems sweet on him). He fidgets with the flower behind his back, and seems to be contemplating giving it to the rich woman, when her fiancé's large flower arrangement arrives. Balduin realizes he needs money to woo this woman (forgetting, seemingly, that he'd wanted a rich woman for money in the first place anyway).
He makes a deal with Scarpinetti: 600,000 pieces of gold (! - error in the intertitle, maybe?) and Scarpinetti gets to take anything he wishes from Balduin's room. He manages to take Balduin's mirror reflection, and while that would seem to be the end of the deal, Scarpinetti still influences events in Balduin's life.
There are some striking scenes in the movie, and some scenes that really drag. One that goes on for a long time is a party after someone had died, and there doesn't seem to be much purpose to it, or at least for it to have been so long.
Balduin's mirror reflection doppelganger doesn't show up much, but figures in more towards the end, which is pretty satisfactory. I'm curious to see the other adaptations of this story now as well.
A mephistophelian character named Scarpinetti offers to deliver on that, and in one scene dramatically stands atop a windy hill by a fallen tree gesturing towards a hunting party. They seem to follow his directions, which leads to a rich heiress having trouble with her horse near Balduin, who rescues her.
However, this is just a tease from Scarpinetti. Balduin goes to visit the woman later, taking with him a flower from a poor flower girl (who seems sweet on him). He fidgets with the flower behind his back, and seems to be contemplating giving it to the rich woman, when her fiancé's large flower arrangement arrives. Balduin realizes he needs money to woo this woman (forgetting, seemingly, that he'd wanted a rich woman for money in the first place anyway).
He makes a deal with Scarpinetti: 600,000 pieces of gold (! - error in the intertitle, maybe?) and Scarpinetti gets to take anything he wishes from Balduin's room. He manages to take Balduin's mirror reflection, and while that would seem to be the end of the deal, Scarpinetti still influences events in Balduin's life.
There are some striking scenes in the movie, and some scenes that really drag. One that goes on for a long time is a party after someone had died, and there doesn't seem to be much purpose to it, or at least for it to have been so long.
Balduin's mirror reflection doppelganger doesn't show up much, but figures in more towards the end, which is pretty satisfactory. I'm curious to see the other adaptations of this story now as well.
Decent Remake
Michael_Elliott29 February 2008
Student of Prague, The (1926)
** 1/2 (out of 4)
German horror/drama is a remake of the 1914 version, which was the first German horror film. A poor college student (Conrad Veidt) falls in love with a rich girl but knows he'll never get her due to his poorness. Then enters Scapinelli (Werner Krauss), a strange man who offers the student 600,000 gold pieces in return for something from the students room. The student agrees but is shocked when the man takes his soul. Outside the good performances by Veidt and Krauss, this film really doesn't add too much that the 1914 film didn't do better. This film here runs fifty-minutes longer but the tiresome pace doesn't help matters and even the special effects were better done in the previous version.
** 1/2 (out of 4)
German horror/drama is a remake of the 1914 version, which was the first German horror film. A poor college student (Conrad Veidt) falls in love with a rich girl but knows he'll never get her due to his poorness. Then enters Scapinelli (Werner Krauss), a strange man who offers the student 600,000 gold pieces in return for something from the students room. The student agrees but is shocked when the man takes his soul. Outside the good performances by Veidt and Krauss, this film really doesn't add too much that the 1914 film didn't do better. This film here runs fifty-minutes longer but the tiresome pace doesn't help matters and even the special effects were better done in the previous version.
Well-Made, but Not Perfect
silentmoviefan14 January 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This German silent film is like just about every German silent movie I've seen: very well-made. It conveys emotion very well. The scene in which Balduin (Conrad Veidt) rescues an heiress from her horse is well-done. Another scene that is well-done is toward the end when Balduin shoots at a ghostly image of himself. The image disappears and he ends up shooting a mirror, which shatters on impact. Mirrors do play an important part of this film. Early in the film, Balduin gets picked on incessantly by his fellow students. A demonic-like figure (played by Werner Krauss) appears to him. Balduin tells him he'd like an heiress. The horse-rescue scene I've referred to, arranged by Krauss' character, introduces Balduin to the heiress. Later, in Balduin's room, the demonic figure promises him a sum of money. In exchange, Krauss' character wants Balduin's mirror reflection, which disappears as the two are looking in Balduin's mirror. Like I said in my title, this is a well-made film, but it's not perfect. It's a real downer and I'm not particularly fond of sad movies. Still, it's worth viewing, I think.
Second of three
Leofwine_draca27 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
THE STUDENT OF PRAGUE (1926, original title Der Student von Prag) is the second of three filmed adaptations of a Hans Heinz Ewers novel about a man who sells his soul to the Devil with unexpected consequences. The influences are varied and include both Poe and the classic FAUST. Another German Expressionist film, it stars the great Conrad Veidt as an impoverished student who falls in love with a member of the nobility but finds his lack of wealth holding him back. An old man offers him a great amount of cash which he accepts, but in return he finds his reflection stolen.
Veidt gives a fine dual performance in this one and makes for a strong lead, helping the viewer through some of the slower moments. It's well directed and highly dramatic throughout, quite romantic in places, and subtle too, with not much horror content, at least until the ornate climax in which our hero finds himself stalked by an evil doppelganger. This is the part where Veidt's staring eyes and skeletal features really come into their own for a truly creepy and fitting end to what has been an interesting story.
Veidt gives a fine dual performance in this one and makes for a strong lead, helping the viewer through some of the slower moments. It's well directed and highly dramatic throughout, quite romantic in places, and subtle too, with not much horror content, at least until the ornate climax in which our hero finds himself stalked by an evil doppelganger. This is the part where Veidt's staring eyes and skeletal features really come into their own for a truly creepy and fitting end to what has been an interesting story.
Good but less exciting than the 1913-version
Philipp_Flersheim7 March 2022
I loved the original 'Der Student von Prag', made in 1913, so obviously I could not resist this remake. The version I watched is the one restored on behalf of the Munich Film Archive. It is almost 2 hours 15 minutes long and has been re-tinted, and the music has been re-recorded if it is not altogether new. All in all the remake is not bad. It has some advantages over the original. Thus, the acting is better throughout, with Conrad Veidt as Balduin and Elizza La Porta as Lyduschka being outstanding. Veidt does much better than Paul Wegener in the 1913-version, and Lyduschka's role has been expanded to such an extent that La Porta had a real chance to show off her talent. The film was her breakthrough perfomance. The scene with the reflection Scapinelli (Werner Krauß) takes from the mirror in Balduin's room is just as as good as in the original, and so is the final scene. Werner Krauß' acting is very good, too. On the downside: The remake is long and the plot does occasionally drag. I also found Veidt looks far too mature to play a student (but that goes for Wegener in the original, too). The tinting. I realise the film was originally shown tinted, but what in other pictures is a beautiful amber here looks like a garish yellow. I disliked the pink used for all interior scenes, too. And finally, the storyline follows that of the original so closely that there are few surprises. All in all, the 1926-version is a competently made film but it is less innovative and exciting than the 1913 'Student'. I am therefore rating it a little lower.
Sadly neglected horror masterpiece
Binx_Bolling1 July 2005
You never know what you'll come up with when you go bottom-fishing in the budget bins at Tower Video. Last week, for 6 bucks, I scored a movie I'd been questing a long time. It's the silent German chiller, "The Student of Prague." So what if the print (from an outfit called Alpha Video) is scratchy, fuzzy, and discolored, and if the contrast is so poor at times that I wasn't sure which character I was watching. Hey -- life isn't always a Criterion disc. At least it didn't cost me $40, and at least I finally got to see this movie. It's a gem, and it should be much, much better known. It tells the Mephistophelean tale of a university student named Balduin (the great Conrad Veidt), a dashing fellow and the best fencer in Prague. Unfortunately, he's also penniless, which puts him out of the running for the hand of the beautiful countess with whom he has become smitten. This makes him an easy mark for the Devil, who arrives in Prague one day in the guise of a mysterious stranger named Scapinelli. Scapinelli offers Balduin the astounding sum of 600,000 gold pieces, with only one string attached: Scapinelli gets to take whatever item he wants from Balduin's room. Balduin, glancing around his spartan crib, recognizes that it's filled with nothing but worthless junk. In short, the deal seems to be a no-brainer, and Balduin hastens for the dotted line. No sooner does Scapinelli hand over the dough than he announces which item he wants: it's Balduin's reflection in the mirror. And, in an amazing scene, he calls it forth. The special effects are primitive, of course, yet smashing. The rest of the movie is basically a series of confrontations between Balduin and the unleashed reflection, which has transmuted into a malicious doppelgänger. I won't reveal the final confrontation, which is astounding, both dramatically and cinematic ally, but it's not a spoiler to reveal Balduin's epitaph (which is revealed at the fade-in before the story is told in flashback): "This monument is dedicated to Balduin, the best fencer in Prague. He gambled with Evil and lost
.Adieu, Balduin."
The only things I know about director Henrik Galeen are that he directed "The Golem" and wrote "Nosferatu." But I am willing to maintain that he was a movie genius of the first order. His work is full of wonderful expressionistic flourishes, reminiscent of "Caligari," which is probably not surprising since the two movies share the same production designer, Hermann War (they also share Veidt of course). The movie's highlights are unforgettably effective, including the fantastic moment when Scapinelli's giant shadow snatches a love letter that Balduin has sent to the countess. In another scene, Galeen uses a shaky hand-held camera for a drunken POV shot. There's also a neat bit of foreshadowing in an early scene in which Balduin fences with himself in the mirror. I noticed some other shots that anticipated future movies:
o A long shot of Scapinelli, in silhouette, alone on a hilltop next to a solitary tree, vowing revenge ("Gone With the Wind") o A fox hunt captured through hand-held cameras and jerky editing ("Tom Jones") o A lovelorn girl sublimates her unrequited feelings for a guy by secretly cleaning his apartment ("Chungking Express") and get a load of the way she fondles his saber! YOW!
Either these shots are coincidences, or "The Student of Prague" was far more influential than is generally known.
Well, now that I have finally bagged "The Student of Prague," I can turn my quest to two other objects: (1) a decent print of it (preferably in a theatrical screening); and (2) the original 1913 movie, of which this 1926 version is just a johnny-come-lately remake.
The only things I know about director Henrik Galeen are that he directed "The Golem" and wrote "Nosferatu." But I am willing to maintain that he was a movie genius of the first order. His work is full of wonderful expressionistic flourishes, reminiscent of "Caligari," which is probably not surprising since the two movies share the same production designer, Hermann War (they also share Veidt of course). The movie's highlights are unforgettably effective, including the fantastic moment when Scapinelli's giant shadow snatches a love letter that Balduin has sent to the countess. In another scene, Galeen uses a shaky hand-held camera for a drunken POV shot. There's also a neat bit of foreshadowing in an early scene in which Balduin fences with himself in the mirror. I noticed some other shots that anticipated future movies:
o A long shot of Scapinelli, in silhouette, alone on a hilltop next to a solitary tree, vowing revenge ("Gone With the Wind") o A fox hunt captured through hand-held cameras and jerky editing ("Tom Jones") o A lovelorn girl sublimates her unrequited feelings for a guy by secretly cleaning his apartment ("Chungking Express") and get a load of the way she fondles his saber! YOW!
Either these shots are coincidences, or "The Student of Prague" was far more influential than is generally known.
Well, now that I have finally bagged "The Student of Prague," I can turn my quest to two other objects: (1) a decent print of it (preferably in a theatrical screening); and (2) the original 1913 movie, of which this 1926 version is just a johnny-come-lately remake.
Something about this film
lucad_9918 November 2017
I have watched a lot of silent films in my life (love the genre) and I must say in a lot of ways this film blew me away more than most. I love Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Nosferatu and Metropolis, but this film snuck up on me in a way I didn't expect that none of those films did. It was scary. Scarier than Nosferatu. I couldn't keep my eyes off the screen. It's also beautiful. Some scenes, like Werner Krauss on the Mountaintop, are riveting. It starts out almost as a joke with the tombstone, but that tombstone later becomes a slap in the face. Conrad Veidt is always good, but here he is so painfully and chillingly aware of his huge mistake every time he looks in the mirror and it shows so well. He seems to find one thing in each movie that will make him unforgettable. I wanted to rewind the student's life as the horror set in. I am sure this movie influenced many film noir directors with the cinematography. I could see the future of film here and I will definitely watch it again.
Doppelgänger
Cineanalyst2 August 2004
At the least, remakes should allow an opportunity to see the differences in film-making from different periods, and, hopefully, to see the advances made in the years bypast; at best, it displays something new and intelligent to a familiar story. The 1913 version of "The Student of Prague" was a film meant to bring respectability to cinema by adapting popular literature; however, the filmmakers lacked an understanding of their own medium and created a, for then, typically static motion picture. Henrik Galeen made this remake during the maturity of one of the greatest periods of national cinema in the history of the art form.
Obviously, close-ups and medium shots were common by 1926, where there were none in the aforementioned film of 1913. There's scene dissection, some inspired cinematography and editing and expressionistic sets by Hermann Warm, as well. We actually get to see the actors here, and Conrad Veidt and Werner Krauss do exceptionally well. The gypsy storyline fits into this version easily.
Cinematographers Günther Krampf and Erich Nitzschmann produced a large shadow of the Devil, which interacts with mass, in one shot; superimpose a saw cutting at Balduin's head in a moment of internal narration; shake the camera for a drunk POV shot; use irises and move the camera during close-ups. The rescue from a horse scene and the haunting finale are the most impressive visually, for the chiaroscuro lighting, special effects and editing. Some shots even seem intentionally reminiscent of the 1913 version. Additionally, the filmmakers were able to punctuate the mirror motif within this film of the doppelgänger thanks to state-of-the-art effects.
Obviously, close-ups and medium shots were common by 1926, where there were none in the aforementioned film of 1913. There's scene dissection, some inspired cinematography and editing and expressionistic sets by Hermann Warm, as well. We actually get to see the actors here, and Conrad Veidt and Werner Krauss do exceptionally well. The gypsy storyline fits into this version easily.
Cinematographers Günther Krampf and Erich Nitzschmann produced a large shadow of the Devil, which interacts with mass, in one shot; superimpose a saw cutting at Balduin's head in a moment of internal narration; shake the camera for a drunk POV shot; use irises and move the camera during close-ups. The rescue from a horse scene and the haunting finale are the most impressive visually, for the chiaroscuro lighting, special effects and editing. Some shots even seem intentionally reminiscent of the 1913 version. Additionally, the filmmakers were able to punctuate the mirror motif within this film of the doppelgänger thanks to state-of-the-art effects.
Too many flaws to be really defining of the silent film genre
Horst_In_Translation30 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Der Student von Prag" or "The Student of Prague" or "The Man Who Cheated Life" is a German German-language movie from 1926, so this one already had its 90th anniversary last year. The writer and director is Henrik Galeen and he also adapted the novel by Hanns Heinz Ewers for the big screen here. But despite the cast including pretty big names from that era like Conrad Veidt playing the title character or also Werner Krauss, it is not as well-known today as the Paul Wegener version that is already over a century old. But we talked about that one on a previous occasion and today the 1926 one is on the agenda. It runs for roughly 90 minutes in the version I watched and is of course a black-and-white silent film. I believe the acting is okay. The two actors I mentioned earlier are great together in their mirror scene and Veidt demonstrates throughout the entire film, but also especially in the scenes where he plays two very different characters why he is still considered one of the finest from the silent film era today. As for scene, the mirror scene once again needs to be mentioned and the occasional overacting there (very common for b&w silent films sadly) is not a problem in this one. The ending is also pretty great as Veidt's character tries to get away from his shadow, but there it needs to be said that the exact ending is not good at all and with this I mean the (almost) very last shot, namely when we see the protagonist die from a bullet he fired into his shadow. It just did not make any sense. Either the shadow should be gone or he should still be there as he always was antagonizing the central character. That's what I thought at least. The final shot of the grave is so-so. Not too inspired really.
And all in all, I was relatively underwhelmed here. Apart from the occasionally solid moments I already mentioned the film was not really interesting for the most part. This especially refers to the part with the romance / female main character which I thought was entirely forgettable. It's not on a level where it destroys this 1.5-hour movie, but it just drags a whole lot. Also I really wished Krauss had more screen time. Or they could have elaborated on him more. Who is he? Why does he want to do what he does? What does he gain from it? Why does he disappear so quickly? Where does he come from? etc. It all felt a bit unrefined at times. I have not read the novel I mentioned earlier, so not sure if Galeen or Ewers is the one to blame. I can only say that the eventual outcome of this movie is not really a success. Of course, more intertitles would have helped as well. Gotta give it a thumbs-down and I suggest you watch something else instead.
And all in all, I was relatively underwhelmed here. Apart from the occasionally solid moments I already mentioned the film was not really interesting for the most part. This especially refers to the part with the romance / female main character which I thought was entirely forgettable. It's not on a level where it destroys this 1.5-hour movie, but it just drags a whole lot. Also I really wished Krauss had more screen time. Or they could have elaborated on him more. Who is he? Why does he want to do what he does? What does he gain from it? Why does he disappear so quickly? Where does he come from? etc. It all felt a bit unrefined at times. I have not read the novel I mentioned earlier, so not sure if Galeen or Ewers is the one to blame. I can only say that the eventual outcome of this movie is not really a success. Of course, more intertitles would have helped as well. Gotta give it a thumbs-down and I suggest you watch something else instead.
another veidt gem
mlink-36-981512 October 2014
I first saw this at Pacific Film Archive & was looking forward to it. But the projection was so slow that I became nervous & it seemed to be taking forever to get going. Finally after about 40 min. I had to leave. The film just was unwatchable at that speed. Afterwards I regretted not staying to the end. Now I have seen it on DVD I understand it a lot more and it still drags at 110 min. But the Archive print was perfect & the DVD has lots of frames missing. The best effect was Veidt walking out of the mirror. Beautifully done. There are a lot of titles removed & you can see someone tell somebody something & with the title removed there is a jump cut. HINT: the people who made the movie did so to give the audience information. when a title is removed you get the opposite effect. You become confused & cheated. The movie does not need a 2nd editor. The editor on the credits is fine. Its possible to ruin a movie by this stupidity.
A Son of Peter Schlemihl
donpipone22 July 2003
A student's life in 19th century Prague wasn't quite easy without money. On the one hand side the sons of rich people are making a fool of Balduin (Conrad Veidt) on the other side the poor student himself, fallen in love with duke Schwarzenberg's daughter. Shadows between two trees, and the appearing of a dark man with an indecent offer. The fight against the devil (alis mammon). A mysterious atmosphere with pathetic actors. One of the most popular German silent-movies!!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
