Protraph Lack of good storyline.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Phillida Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

silentmoviefan In watching this film last night, instantly comparisons came to mind with the 1927 version starring Conrad Veidt.Overall, I believe it compares pretty favorably. First of all, it's not such a downer. The Veidt version starts with a picture of his character's gravestone. It also ends with the gravestone.This one starts with a scene in the courtyard of the college. A lot of extras were used in this scene.Another thing this one has over the later version is it's better at explaining what's going on. In one scene, Paul Wegener's double goes to kill the girl's Wegener likes' fiancée and you have a nice title card explaining that. The later version does not.It's also interesting to see Wegener in his pre-Golem days. I wouldn't call him handsome, but he doesn't look anywhere near as fierce.Still another thing this version has over the latter one is the appearance of Scapanelli. Poor doomed John Gottowot looks much more like an evil presence than the one in the latter version.Wegener's death scene is nowhere near as spectacular as Veidt's in the latter version. In fact, in watching this, I thought he had stabbed himself, but I wasn't sure until Wegener fell to the ground.Gottowot is in the final scene and he pulls it off really, really well. I'll let you see what I'm talking about.Overall, I liked it quite a bit, better than the Veidt version.

Hitchcoc Those engaging the movie camera so early in the century must have figured out some of its potential very early on. This is a good story of a playboy type who needs money and inadvertently sells his soul to Satan for a lot of money. Unfortunately, the soul is his double and he must confront him frequently, tearing his life apart. There are some wonderful scenes with people fading out and, of course, the scenes when the two are on the stage at the same time. The middle part is a bit dull, but the Faustian story is always in the minds of the viewer. One thing I have to mention is the general unattractiveness of the people in the movie. Also, they pretty much shied away from much action which would have at least given some life to the thing. I first was made aware of this movie about 25 years ago and have finally been able to see it. I was not disappointed.

FieCrier I watched Alpha's DVD of this, which was only about forty-one minutes long. I don't know if it was missing scenes, or run at a faster speed, or what, to account for the difference from the running time IMDb has. As with Alpha's DVD of the remake, I didn't particularly care for the musical score they'd added. I think it's possible they also missed some of the intertitles; one of the other users mentions something Balduin says after his reflection is taken that wasn't in the copy I viewed.A renowned fencer asks a man named Scapinelli to procure him a winning lottery ticket, or a woman with a large dowry. The opening credits indicate Scapinelli is a sorcerer; he isn't used much in this film, and we don't know really anything about him when we first meet him, or what relationship Balduin has with him. In the remake, Balduin doesn't ask for those things, just wishes for a rich woman (not expecting the wish to come true), and Scapinelli promises to deliver.A rich woman who is riding horses with her fiancé (also her first cousin) falls off her horse into a body of water, and Balduin saves her. In the remake, it's clear that Scapinelli guides her horse to Balduin and then causes the horse to act wildly, until Balduin scoops her off it. Here, it's unclear that Scapinelli had anything to do with it.There are many scenes here that are reproduced in the sequel. Possibly even some of the same camera shots are copied.The ending is not as powerful as the ending of the sequel. Still, this was interesting to watch and at the price of Alpha's DVDs, a bargain. Perhaps a better edition will come out sometime in the future.

Elliot-10 If "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" is the father of all horror films (and of German expressionist cinema), this pre-WWI film is the grandfather. The titular student, starving in an empty garret, makes a deal with the Devil-- the Devil gives him a bottomless sack of gold, in exchange for "anything in this room." The Devil chooses the student's reflection in his mirror. He walks off with the student's doppelganger, who commits crimes for which the student is blamed.The film is marred by some limitations arising out of the technically primitive state of 1913 filmmaking; the plot cries out for chiaroschuro effects, but the film is, of necessity, virtually all shot in shadowless daylight. But the scene where the reflection walks out of the mirror still packs a wallop.More interesting for the trends it fortells than for its own sake, The Student of Prague is still worthwhile.