A poor student (Paul Wegener) rescues a beautiful countess (Grete Berger) and soon becomes obsessed with her. A sorcerer (John Gottowt) makes a deal with the young man to give him fabulous wealth and anything he wants, if he will sign his name to a contract.The film is loosely based on "William Wilson", a short story by Edgar Allan Poe, the poem "The December Night" by Alfred de Musset, and Faust. The Faust elements are obvious, the other two less so (though the Musset quotation might give it away). This is really a great early example of horror literature on screen.Cinematographer Guido Seeber utilized groundbreaking camera tricks to create the effect of the Doppelgänger (mirror double), producing a seamless double exposure. Hanns Heinz Ewers was a noted writer of horror and fantasy stories whose involvement with the screenplay lent a much needed air of respectability to the fledgling art form.

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.

This early version of the tale 'The Student of Prague' was made in Germany in 1913, starring Paul Wegener (who was also in 'The Golem' a few years later). In this film he plays a dual role (technically impressive for a 95 year old film to see them in the same shot) after meeting a mysterious old man who makes a pact with him for gold - the gold he needs to woo a countess he's previously saved from drowning.Moving at a fast pace (the film runs just over an hour) and fairly well written and characterised, 'The Student of Prague' has echoes of the Faust legend as well as Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, starting as it does with a pact with a mysterious figure of potential evil, and developing into good and evil sides of the same person.

Student of Prague, The (1913) ** 1/2 (out of 4)A poor college student (Paul Wegener) falls in love with a rich woman so he makes a deal with a sorcerer. The sorcerer pays him 100,000 gold pieces for anything in the student's room. The sorcerer decides to steal the student's soul. This is a pretty good horror film that manages to have a few very creepy scenes including the first scene where the soul is taken. The rest of the film is pretty weak working itself up towards the very good ending. This is still a very important film for horror fans to seek out.You can check my review of the remake here as well.