The Canal

Not overly inspired, but worthy of a watch. It meanders between supernatural and psychosis. Nothing wrong with any one aspect but just seems like it never really gripped me enough to really enjoy.

I don't know why the IMDb score and Metacritic score are so low on this one. That's one of the reasons I put off watching it for a while but I'm so glad I finally got around to seeing it; it's one of the better horror films of recent years, and I'm a huge horror junkie. If you like disturbing horror that gets under your skin and doesn't rely on jump scares or constant gore then this is for you. The film is beautifully shot and has some exceptionally creepy visuals. It's sporadically violent and cruel but every moment of blood letting or grotesquerie is expertly handled and actually frightening rather than pure gross-out. I urge you not to watch the trailer as it contains spoilers I wish I hadn't known before going into it. If you want to know what to expect, I'd say it's got elements of films such as The Shining and The Ring, but it has a very unique feel. There's a nice dose of drama along with the horror and Rupert Evans is thoroughly believable and engaging in the lead role, much more so than your average modern horror protagonist. Highly recommended!

Despite some of the poor reviews I've read here, I found this to be a completely coherent and excellent psychological Thriller/Horror movie! Yes you will see some themes borrowed from other films, but let's be honest every movie does that. The cinematography was amazing. The score was arranged with a lot of attention to details and made it perfect backdrop to the film. Transitions and shadows were creepy and eerie. About the only thing that annoyed me what's the editing in which the way the editor wood chop out frames causing a time jump effect. This worked okay as a transition but awful during actress dialogue. All in all it was a great movie.

The Canal is basically a ghost story mixed with a whodunit. David's wife is missing and, when he sees a mysterious man on the same night as her disappearance, he begins to suspect the man is responsible. However, his suspicions lead him to believe the man is actually the ghost of a former murderer who once lived in his house.

It's not the most original idea for a film, but it unfolds in such a way as to feel quite different. The visual aspects of this movie are very memorable, as is the performance from its lead, Rupert Evans and, combined with a simple but compelling story, the film as a whole is very effective.

For those of you tired of the dreaded jump-scare-wins plague that infests this genre at the moment (Haunting in Connecticut 2 being a prime example), The Canal is the cream that floats to the surface, as per The Woman In Black or (the good parts of) Sinister. It concentrates on David's deteriorating state of mind and the effect this has on those around him, to drag the viewer into his crumbling world, thus making his visions of the supernatural more believable. Supporting actress Kelly Byrne is also very good, bringing an unusual amount of realism into her role as the babysitter and, more importantly, the relationship she has with David.

Stealing at times from classic scenes in The Ring and The Grudge leaves it open to some likely accusations of it ripping off the Japanese classics but I think that would be a narrow-minded criticism. For the most part, The Canal has a refreshingly quirky feel to it, but in a Kubricky rather than Lynchy style and that is arguably its greatest strength because it's a shiny finish on an already polished script and screenplay.

To say that The Canal is this years "The Conjuring" is true - if you found the Conjuring scary. But The Canal feels wholly different; it sits firmly in the independent camp yet has the potential to be a runaway mainstream hit, due to its efficient use of effects and, quite frankly, ability to instill dread in the viewer.

I tweeted this as being a horror masterpiece after I walked out of the cinema. I don't think I was being too unrealistic.

A pretty effective thriller even if the script uses the usual old clichés of ghost movies. I had a good time watching it and wasn't disappointed. However, I deplore the use (around 43 or 44 minutes of film) of the real photographs of Sharon Tate's crime scene after she was brutally murdered by Manson's followers. I think that is not respectful. The director could have avoided that.