neil-progroupafrica
Slow paced and disconnected in parts. Poor sound on prison scenes was quite annoying.
ppbkwrtr
I don't know why I even started watching this movie. First, I can barely tolerate Rosamund Pike. She comes off as a snotty ice princess in everything she plays. She seems to have no range, unable to give any other type of performance other than cold, bored, elitist. And then, THEN, she says she killed her father's dog??? Why the hell do people insist on killing animals just to further a boring plot-line? The man that raped her is one of those carved in stone sleazy, disgusting bullies that always kills, rapes, or somehow brutalizes women. The movie was predictable and the actors so dyed in the wool bad, I fast-forwarded through some of it. Nick Nolte was wasted in this movie.
jtindahouse
I'm sitting here having watched 'Return to Sender' and I genuinely don't know what to think. I'm not even sure whether I enjoyed it or not. I could justify giving it a '3' and I could equally justify giving it a '9'. It's my kind of movie first of all. I love the 'revenge' genre. This is an odd case of that genre though. In fact I wasn't even sure it was that type of movie until 4/5 of the way through, despite the movie poster heavily implying it. It's not a particularly well made movie, at least technically. The sound engineering is poorly done in certain scenes. Every scene involving the prison phones is incredibly hard to hear the dialogue in. It chops in and out and is often inaudible. The story is choppy and alienates the audience at times by leaving them clueless as to what the point of this all is. And yet through all this, I was having a pretty good time watching it (I think).Rosamund Pike is a very fine actress and has the chops to carry a movie (as she proved in 'Gone Girl'). She's again pretty good here, and with a stronger script could have accomplished a performance on par with her one in 'Gone Girl' (the two roles are actually strikingly similar). It's hard to explain exactly what an odd experience 'Return to Sender' is to someone who hasn't seen it. Would I recommend this film for someone to watch? I'm still not entirely sure. The only thing I can say is watch it to see what I mean.
MovieMama625
OK, so it's not going to win major awards, but it's a decent little flick that deserves more credit than the 1-4 ratings. Maybe those who gave it such a low rating didn't really grasp the meaning with the story....I guess "All that glitters isn't always golden" comes to mind. It's not always who seems likely to be the TRULY evil ones. Some people are a product of their environment ie. being abused as a child & then turn to crime & turn into bad people (sociopaths)and some people are just born with something missing inside, one who is just truly evil -although from outer appearances one would never know as they come across very normal even successful (psychopaths) and what happens if these two collide, if one tries to make a victim of the other??.. I think this movie tries to give an example of just that & which one will most likely triumph. That's my take on it anyway...
AD
