Der Student von Prag

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.

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...

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.

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

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.