The Canal

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.

The family man David (Rupert Evans) and his pregnant wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) buy an old house nearby a canal to raise a family of their own. Five years later, their son Billy is the pride and joy of the family. David works archiving and editing films for his partner and friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes). When she gives a reel of a 1902 footage to work, David learns that his house was the place of a violent murder. This discover haunts David that sees a stranger inside his house threatening his son. When he finds that Alice is cheating on him with her client Alex (Carl Shaaban), David sees the stranger killing Alice and becomes obsessed to find who the suspect might be. Meanwhile he becomes the prime suspect of the police with his disturbed attitudes.

"The Canal" is an ambiguous horror movie with the story of a man that has a breakdown after learning that his home was the place of a brutal murder in 1902 and that his beloved wife is cheating on him. The story of haunting, obsession and madness has a confused screenplay and slow pace. But the acting and the dark cinematography make worthwhile watching this movie with low expectation and have a surprise. The creepy conclusion is the ambiguity of the story. Was David really insane? My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Canal" ("The Canal")

Captivating with intimate struggle, The Canal offers more than grisly scenes or bloody gore. It is imposing and disturbing on deeper psychological level, much credit to Rupert Evans who performs splendidly to that effect. In contrast to majority of horror flicks that have grainy filter, The Canal looks very quaint. The overlook of the vista or the color palette are brightly lit, but it effectively delivers a harrowing atmosphere.

David (Rupert Evans) is an archivist of retro movies who lives with his son and perhaps not so loving wife. He receives a movie that depicts his house was the site of a murder scene one century ago. David is a rather timid man, he has doubts and not particularly dominant. So, when he becomes more troubled by the prospect of phantom presence, he deteriorates mentally. Rupert Evans captures the character brilliantly, both verbally and with body language. It's very easy to see David as an average man, filled with hidden anger and nagging anguish.

The movie presents the terror with exquisite taste, it doesn't need cheap trick. It might show the scenes as David sees it or not show anything out of ordinary at all, the anticipation works better than the usual apparition shocks. As David's occupation is related to cinema, there are many sequences with antique cameras or slides. These old cryptic monochrome relic and modern screen mashes together exceptionally well, occasionally producing jittery motion which just feels inhuman.

With a pristine cinematography, the film is engagingly fun, although it may be odd to say this for a horror film. The angle and blitz fast editing are fresh, it focuses at the right thing at the right moment, it's simply hard to not be immersed. Most of the time it depicts a beautiful landscape of European suburb, yet it has underlying bleakness to it which is persuasively disturbing.

There have not been many films that create horror in such personal level, let with alone solid cinematography. The Canal is nightmarish delightful.

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.

But as others have noted rushes towards the finish line (which is a good thing). But there are a few hurdles the movie has to overcome to win over the viewer. And it might not even achieve this. Not everyone has the patience to wait for a movie to pick up. Especially after not only a slow start, but a character that seems to be doing as many wrong things he can do wrong.

But if you overlook that typical horror movie cliché and can wait for the movie to really pick up, you will like where it goes eventually. The direction is decent and the acting is good too. The story is not really inventive, but moves the film along nicely. There are few good scares along the way and the mentioned ending is really good