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!

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")

Independent film The Canal smartly produces a slow-paced psychological horror that interesting imagines a new take on the haunting genre.

Ivan Kavanagh is the brainchild behind this original and brilliantly conceived film. The Canal is more atmospheric than most horror films currently being produced and very psychological with a horrific twist. The slow paced groundwork is eerie and unsettling but expertly done. The characters and smart and savvy in trying discern reality from imagination, or worse, supernatural occurrences.

The beginning scenes of The Canal are deliberately jumpy, adding to the confusion and anxiety the main character David experiences. A bit more clarity would have helped the film viewers experience the intended disorientation while avoiding pure confusion. I personally think the film was just a tad too slow in the beginning and Kavanagh will lose impatient movie watchers unsure of whether the investment will be worth it.

Without spoiling the ending, I thoroughly enjoyed it and it had me squirming and gasping. The Canal is a slow burn, with Kavanagh pacing the film so audience members are psychologically bewildered to savor the conclusive reveal.

For more FULL reviews of RECENT releases, please check out our website.

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.

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.

This movie gave me the bad creeps. Couldn't walk downstairs alone after. Had to wake my husband ups total freak show. I had to hide my eyes for parts. Right down to the ending. I wasn't that impressed by The Conjouring. At all. This movie is that movie to the tenth power. It's a slow creep. It's strange how we all get scared by different things. I'm not a jump out scare person. I'm the type that likes the times when you know something horrible is coming. And you have to make yourself look.. This movie did kinda copy a part in The Ring. Another movie that scared me when it first came out. It was just as effective this time around. The demons in this movie are scary. The murder scene in this movie is probably the most shocking one I've seen on film. It was so in your face. Most times movies try to hide in some shadows, or clips.. This movie gave me the feeling I wanted to step back. To get away. I needed some space between me and the scene. Anyways, make sure you have someone to hold onto. Don't watch this one alone.

If David is not a member of the top 1% he is living a comfortable life in a big house with his wife and their young son. A two income household, invitations to parties, a vocation rather than a mere job, what could go wrong? Nothing, until his work leads him to a film taken in 1902, silent footage, of course, but this is not entertainment, rather it is film of either a documentary or more likely an official nature relating to a murder in his house. A man had stabbed his adulterous wife 52 times then dumped her body in the canal. How does this relate to David?

Well, his wife had been having an affair, and when she goes missing...

Her body is found, you guessed it, in the canal, but the pathologist is of the opinion there was no foul play.

Tragic for sure, but that would have been the end of things if David had kept his mouth shut. After the funeral, he researches the case; the deranged husband had not stopped at one murder, to begin with, there was the nanny, and of course, David has a live-in nanny for his young son. Oh dear.

The big question - is it all in his head? The police seem to think so; it is clear that in spite of the verdict the lead detective on the case believes he knows more about his wife's death than he is letting on, but when David tells him about the ghost, social services try to take his son from him. He defeats that attempt, but the police are still watching him, and not protectively either.

You have a sneaking feeling this is not going to end well for David, but although this is quite a good atmospheric film there are the usual problems with films of this nature, namely you never know quite what is going on, what is going to be dream or reality, and this can be extremely annoying. Here, he captures a ghost on film and shows it to his colleague, who sees it too. Or does she?

Its been a while since i gave a horror/thriller such a good score but its hard not to score this film high as this masterpiece from ivan kavanagh which is a very clever tale of a missing person with a twist of supernatural, with plenty of suspense scenes that get you to edge of your seat or behind a pillow and a story that will grip you till the end of the credits where you will still be sitting there after the film has finished in silence while this film is still taking effect. Rupert evans (david) is superb and he takes you through so many emotions that you don't know what to do or how to handle it, calum heath (billy) is a star in the making. I advise you to watch this but turn your phone off and do not be disturbed for 93 minutes of nothing short of cinema magic but be warned its not for the faint of hearted!!

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

Having seen tons of horror movies, I decided to give this a fair chance. I enjoyed it. It's well filmed, well acted and well written. It's about a couple and child who move into a house (with a dark history). The man soon after discovers his wife is cheating on him and dies under mysterious circumstances. The police suspect him, he suspects a dark force related to the house is to blame. The movie is filmed in such a way that the viewer isn't certain if a dark force is responsible or the man is possibly insane. Even the man is struggling with that as he desperately tries to weave the facts together to solve what occurred to his wife. All the while, his four year old son remains in the house being scared to death by his father.

Bottom Line- I liked the movie but perhaps being a parent with small children of my own caused me more difficulty in watching it. It's probably one of the better movies of this type but I don't see myself wanting to review it again at any point in the future.

Greetings from Lithuania.

"The Canal" (2014) is delusional, boring, badly paced mess. It has one or two chilly moments, but after them you start thinking was it real or just in the head of our main character. I didn't like this guessing, and overall reaction to this movie is very poor.

"The Canal" has not bad acting, and not bad directing at the moments, but overall it's a confusing mess. It's very uneven, with script so confusing that towards the end this movie started to drag and because it's running time is only 1 h 29 min - that's a very bad sign.

Overall, "The Canal" had the potential to become a descent horror flick, if the script weren't so interested in psychological aspects, because as psychological horror movie this one doesn't work - either you play with the audience straight (no psycho stuff), either you have to know how to do it right that it would be interesting to watch. In this movie's case, it done wrong and that's why this movie is confusing and simply boring.

Firstly, this is well worth a watch, purely for some of the quite creepy imagery it portrays very well. Most of which seems to be borrowed from Japanese flicks like The Ring, Dark Water and Pulse - most of which have already been remade..

Unfortunately it's quite unoriginal and predictable. The plot is pretty much laid out on the back of the DVD and there are no real surprises.

What I liked was the imagery - from the very start there was a great rapid cut of disturbing imagery, including the what looked like Un Chien Andalou. There was also some great creepy imagery of dead people that would give Insidious a run for it's money.

The budget also limits the films somewhat. The location is never explained. We never really get a feeling of any of the character's personality in order to identify with them. The wife sounds European (Dutch?). It's never clear what the husband's job actually is - archivist?? at the start he displays the original film of Bunuel etc. to what look like high school kids? he seems to then take orders from the daughter in that Jack Dee sitcom Lead Balloon?. Oh and the police investigation is ridiculous to the point you wonder if it's supposed to be surreal.

Worth a look for the cinematography and some effective jump scares.

This movie is garbage it is nothing but a waste of time simply put. I will not ruin the ending for those of you who want to subject yourselves to a movie playing off the oldest movie trope ever in 2014 no less. Once you get halfway through this film know that what you think this movie is going to end like is exactly correct it is over done. If you think this movie will pull itself out of the gutters on the last moments, you are wrong it is about exactly the way you predicted. This movie is predictable straight from 30 minutes in and you think that it couldn't possibly go there because it is so over done but it actually has the gall to do it. Its pathetic and i don't understand how it was publicized at all, this movie has already been made hundreds of times over. PLease do not waste your time it is utter garbage and does not even deserve its current ratings with people trying to come up with a defense for a poorly written movie. 1 out of 10 never watch again!

THE CANAL is yet another faceless instalment in a never-ending run of cheap haunted house type movies in which ordinary families are scared out of their minds by apparitions and the like. You know exactly how these films will play out before they start: lots of dark sets, attempts at suspense, brooding atmosphere and the like, and not a whole lot of substance.

The entirely unsympathetic Rupert Evans (HELLBOY) is a poor choice of lead, playing an uninspiring guy who moves into a murder house with his wife and young child. Eventually the family are caught up in a series of sinister events, and THE CANAL is always ready to play up the psychological angle of the hauntings, to make you wonder if the events are really happening or if they're just in the main character's head. As if we really care. The film also contains the most blatant rip-off of RING that I've yet to see.

After reading description on IMDb before watching this flick, thought like its kind of haunted house or another sinister like movie & i guess i was right...

But if you using already used concept in your current movie, then you should be able to give something more interesting to audiences than its original version. Fortunately director & script writer tried to do so but unfortunately as end product the film wasn't that effective.

Movie is horror thriller but apart from some good jump scares, it doesn't gives you much more as movie to remember. Thriller & Fear element is badly missing.

Off course you can watch this movie, but even if you don't watch, you are not going to miss anything important...

The Canal is a competent movie with a decent script and competent acting. The problem with this movie is that it tries to be too many things. Is it a horror? Is it a psychological thriller? Is it a movie regarding possession? If one views this expecting a horror movie then they will by sorely disappointed. I viewed this as a psychological thriller and I think this best describes this movie. There are not many scares and I know that the director was heavily influenced by the movie 'The Ring'(you will know what I mean when you see the movie).

The plot is your basic haunted house plot where a family David and Alice along with their son move into a house that was where a murder took place. The father murdered his adulterous wife, the babysitter and his children. Events start mirroring what took place previously. David finds that his wife has been cheating on him, thinks about confronting her but eventually blacks out, only to find that his wife has gone missing. Did David have something to do with his wife's disappearance or is there something more sinister at work? The lead actor Rupert Evans does a great job at portraying the father caught up in a web of fear, grief and betrayal. The supporting cast is good too. You wouldn't go to the cinema to see this. Rent this on DVD/Blu Ray or wait for it to come on free to air TV.

Jackal75

This is definitely a more familiar sort of slow-paced, atmospheric horror, but like so many of its kind, when done right they really work. This isn't a slam dunk or anything, but it's pretty effective for what it is. If you really don't overthink everything, you sort of know everything that is going on, but it doesn't matter. It has some truly strong performances here, and the atmosphere allows for some really creepy scenes to ensue. The climax could use from even more outlandish material, but as it is it makes its point and is pretty effective. For horror fans this is recommended, and for everyone else, well, look as to what types of films you like.

I found the lead in to the characters started not badly but then jumps 3 or 4 years (them being in the house the whole time) little indication of anything weird about the house or main character until the fateful night of the wife's death. The events of the night make very little sense in the context of the lead in ... no indication of intoxication but then its like he's on an acid trip ... make no sense at all without a proper lead in. I'm voting bad writing / screen play at this point and am hesitant to watch the rest of the movie.

I sit back after getting some ice cream hoping to see it get better.

It does improve to suspenseful moments and some shocking bits with obnoxiously loud sound effects and some very hard to hear dialog all the way to a bit of a lame ending.

With time, I managed to put my eyes on a few such productions and I have to tell you, this type of movies can be divided too: you see, you get the just a tad bit better than average ones, like "Psych9", "Devoured" and those really good ones "Session 9" or "The pact".

This one sadly, in my books fells in the first category, it moves too slow and the ending itself managed to pull it out of the water a little but only to see it float away. Yeah, you can feel it burn, more and more, a flame that wants to make some light, but come on, at a certain point you do realize what is happening here. And this is why I say there are 2 types of such productions: first, the ones where the ending kinda reveals itself too early, and the other when the ending is so shocking that you can not believe your eyes. Now, in The Pact or Session 9, everything is worth the wait, they can't show more in order not to betray the conclusion so you just have to be patient. In Devoured, Psych9 or The Canal, even tho at some point they do manage to push you off tracks, it only happens for a few minutes and then you are back where you where sitting for the last half of hour.

This is why I say, it could have been better. A lot better! I mean if they managed to pull that ending out, how come they didn't bother or at least try to make the road to it more decent. We could have had a pavement of scares, instead, just some tension rising, curiosity growing and then the death of all excitement. You get the point too soon! Try all those I mentioned before and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Cheers!

Let me save you a lot of time. The cop tells the husband "You know why everyone always suspects it's the husband? Because it's always the husband." Guess what? It's the husband. And you know it's the husband. Not for a second does any of the slightly supernatural nonsense make sense. Nor is his psychosis really explained. He killed his wife...but the ghost of his wife kills him? So we have supernatural/not supernatural....and then, the dad is suddenly some evil dude living in the wall who orders his five year old son to kill himself so they can all be together? YOU DON'T KILL OFF A SMALL KID IN THE FINAL 60 SECONDS JUST BECAUSE YOU FEEL LIKE IT. Oh, and just to make it more ambiguous, apparently, the woman "sees" the ghost son in the house at the end. I could barely get through this movie, but I thought, huh, really decent reviews, it's got to be worth this crippling slow repetitive garbage. The only reason I'm giving this a two is because the child was such a great actor.

Just caught this in Tribeca and the reaction of the audience was nearly as good as the film itself. I don't normally enjoy "horror" movies but this was different. More intelligent and interesting than the usual "watch out behind you " drivel one sees these days.

I think I will have to see it again as the style was very unique. Whether this was driven by the the budget or a genuine attempt at a fresh approach to the genre I have no idea , but it worked for me. It's rare, for me, to have a film continue to unsettle three days after a viewing but this one stays in the mind.

I would have given it a higher score but I felt it tried to do a little too much in the time allotted , but hey, it beat the hell out of the dross that normally comes out of big budget Hollywood these days. Go see it if you dare and order 2 portions of popcorn , one to eat and the other to hang on to ! you won't regret it !

Every once in a while, you encounter a film that pulls you right in from the beginning, and holds you at the edge of your seat in drama, anticipation... and even fear. And it's an experience that sticks long with you after the film is over.

"The Canal" was one of those special films for me. Written and directed by Irish filmmaker Ivan Kavanagh, it's one of the most shockingly effective horror films I've seen in the past decade, and is a thoroughly mind-bending and genuinely frightening experience.

The film follows David, a film archive specialist who receives disturbing evidence footage from the police that suggests his home was the site of a brutal murder in 1902. This only compounds his personal troubles- his wife's infidelity and subsequent disappearance. Plagued with disturbing visions, David attempts to clear his name as the prime suspect of his wife's murder by delving into the possible dark forces in his home left over from it's dark history- forces he believes may be responsible for her death.

What transpires is a truly disturbing descent into violence and the spirits of the past, leading to a thrilling and heart-stopping climax that will leave open-minded audiences chilled to the bone with fear.

What I truly admired about this film was its expert direction, wonderful sense of ambiguity, and the fantastic performances that really hit home. Director Kavanagh is clearly in his element, giving us a classic tale of horror that oozes with atmosphere and good, old- fashioned creeps. (In addition to some nice, modern visceral chills.) His visual storytelling is a phenomena, and left my heart pounding more and more as the story progressed. It's one of those rare horror films that was just so terrifying, I could almost feel myself slipping into a panic attack- yes, I found it that scary.

Stars Rupert Evans (probably best known for his role in the fantastically fun "Hellboy" adaptation from 2004) and Hannah Hoekstra are absolute perfection in their roles. Particularly Evans, who walks a fine line in the film. His role includes many facets- a concerned father, a mourning husband, a man obsessed with investigating the past, and a desperate struggle to clear his name- and in each aspect, he knocks it clear out of the park. I'd go so far as to say Evans gives one of the best performances of the year. Absolutely wonderful.

Although I will say, despite all my praise, there are just a few minor issues holding the film back from getting a perfect 10 for me. These mainly fall into an inherent cheapness thanks to the lower-budget nature of the production, and a few scares falling flat. While I can forgive these for the most part, they can occasionally distract from the otherwise excellent material.

Still, that being said, this is still by and far one of the most shocking and effective horror films I've seen recently. It may not be for everyone (people who lack patience and expect constant jump-scares may find it boring, and some of the turns in the story can be off- putting for those with a weak stomach), but I think most fans of good horror will absolutely adore this film as I do.

I give "The Canal" a near-perfect 9 out of 10. Definitely give this film a shot if you are interested. Because chances are, if you're open-minded about your horror, you'll just love every eerie second of it!

David (Rupert Evans, somewhat bland) is a film archivist who seems to be having some doubts about his marriage to Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) when he starts to suspect her having an affair with a co-worker. He also stumbles upon some footage at work of a murder that took place not only in his neighborhood, but in the house they share, and he comes to find that the gory deed was done by a husband driven insane by his wife's infidelity. When he confirms his own wife's tryst (in graphic detail) he starts to really go off the deep end… but is it demonic possession or just straight up insanity?

This movie does a good job at blurring that line between a more classic horror movie full of jump scares and a psychological thriller where you witness someone's descent into madness. You really aren't sure which is which for a vast majority of the movie, which really adds some interesting complexity to it. It has some of the same appeals of a possession/haunting movie — the idea that there's some malevolent force at work is terrifying. But the thought that maybe it's his own mind at work is almost more scary.

It's a fairly low budget film, but there were some truly scary moments done that didn't rely much on special effects — one in particular while David is Skyping with his son, Billy (Calum Heath), when a shadowy figure rose from the corner.

I thought it got a little repetitive at times, and the attempted romance from David's co- worker, Claire (the adorable Antonia Campbell-Hughes), felt forced and awkward. The ending was HORRIFIC, to say the least (those images aren't leaving my brain anytime soon), but I didn't think it really matched the rest of the movie, both in style and in graphic goriness. It was like it had this slow burn for 90% and then it ramped up to 100mph REAL QUICK. But the literal last scene I thought had a good amount of creepiness.

Overall I think it was a good blend of genres, and definitely a good amount of psychological creepiness.

I saw the trailer for this movie a few weeks , I thought looked really good and scary

I do think the trailer makes it look more like haunted house movie (which it was not) and scary .

I thought opening scene was strange way to start a movie, I thought rest of the movie was good .

A guy finds out that is house as history of murders, meanwhile he finds out his wife was cheating on him , while he went into the canal , as he heard it was haunted ( which had really good surreal moment )

Then his wife ends up missing and found dead near the canal, soon the husband. Think that him and his son are haunted by the ghost he saw in the canal )

I did not like the twist at all , I did see it coming , I don't think the movie hide It really well, But I really liked those scenes after the twist.

Good movie

The story of David (a absolutely perfect Rupert Evans), a timid softhearted man who slowly looses control of his life after loosing his wife, in this well crafted whodunnit/ghost story.

To call this pure horror would be incorrect. It's really more of a psychological thriller. And the way David breaks down in his obsession of finding out whodunnit is the true horror. The fact that there's a very young and innocent boy involved makes it even more so.

It is however all disguised as a ghost story, and this is done brilliantly. The atmosphere is just great, the colors and lighting are also wonderful. I love what they've managed to do with a (I suspect) small budget. As mentioned before, the lead Rupert Evans can't get enough praise (hard to imagine he's the same guy as the nerdy young man who get's appointed to hold Hellboy's hand). And the kid, even though apparently hardly scared of anything, also does a great job. I also liked the fact that David's wife Alice is Dutch (at least a Dutch actress, with notable accent) and that they choose her mother to be a Dutch actress as well (more notable accent). Nice bit of realistic casting. More praise to that poor nanny Sophie, who also kind of goes through hell.

Atmospheric, stylish, moody and gloomy as hell. Just my cup of tea 8/10