Solemplex To me, this movie is perfection.

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

Glimmerubro It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

cheergal About the failure of this movie, it did not have right surroundings , atmosphere and actors among others. It's way too clean to be a thriller.The title did not set off audience's alarm, either. It could be a good thriller. Rosamund Pike did a decent performance as a psychopathic nurse. Without her involvement, this movie might be unwatchable. Good thrillers are about the senses of surroundings. Waiting for something terrible happened, then catastrophes followed. This one had little to do on that front. Graphic images are low tech for thrillers. They are supposed to bring scare moments to audiences. This movie should be redone in the future. I believe the contents were applicable and original. Lacking efforts weakened this supposedly good thriller.

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.

waterboils Whatever happened to the concept of having a drawing board?The introduction of the lovely female protagonist, followed by her made-for-TV on-screen rape ordeal, had me awkwardly pessimistic, yet cautiously hopeful for a sensitive handling of such a hideous subject.The victim tracks down and visits the rapist in prison, who demonstrates genuine remorse. Like a true angel of forgiveness- an example to us all, she accepts the olive branch of repentance and displays colossal enormity of heart by forgiving her aggressor. Upon his release, she extends her open-hearted generosity of spirit still further by inviting this newly rehabilitated soul to her home.Whilst he helps her to fix up her house, it transpires that her elaborate plan all along was to ultimately manipulate him into a vigilante revenge trap sting, in order to dispense 'real justice' by rendering him helpless and chopping his bits off etc. At this point, viewers can be forgiven for sympathising with either, neither, or both.The piece completely cheapens, and mishandles the subject of rape and sexual violence. It is abhorrent in its representation of victims of such crimes. It undermines good programs that arrange meetings between perpetrators of crime and their victims. It arguably breeds cynicism towards the principles of rehabilitation, forgiveness and redemption, whilst potentially seeding audience sympathy for an ugly and, sadly, all too common 'eye for an eye' philosophy.I'm sure, looking back, the actors (hopefully), and others involved, are extremely embarrassed to be on record as having been involved in this road-kill movie. Conversely, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that some of those involved were initially misled in relation to its ultimate toxicity...To finish, I'd like to establish that I don't automatically object to movies that have graphic scenes like rape, violence etc. A great example: Lilya 4ever. Bleak. Shocking. Brilliant. There are also many examples of brilliant revenge plots that thrill the rational viewer intelligent enough to suspend their disbelief beyond supporting violent vigilantism outside the world of screen! So... Whatever happened to the concept of having a drawing board?It absolutely astounds me that 'Return to Sender' seemingly never saw one. Apparently it is even playing on Sky Movies, so they seem to be a drawing board short of a shiit flick themselves!Cringe factor 10. Of course, watch and post if you agree, disagree or whatever! Just don't pick it if it's a one night, one movie deal!Boom Shanka :)

Puffer Bluntman This movie is probably the most accurate depiction of a sociopath ever created on the big screen. Miranda Wells, ingeniously depicted by the famous "Gone Girl" star Rosamund Pike, a nurse in a local hospital, who is a bit odd, but an all around nice person, gets horribly raped by a no good small time criminal William Finn. But, surprisingly enough, instead of hating on Finn, Miranda visits him in prison, and even hires him to fix her porch... then she drugs him, locks him in her basement, tortures him and probably kills him, revealing previously to that that she have let her mother die, and that she enjoys hospital work because it allows her to inflict pain on patients while treating them (much in a fashion of a dentist in "The Little Shop of Horrors" musical).Miranda Wells is probably the most accurate depiction of a sociopath ever created on film. Her Oscar-worthy acting in Return to Sender very well answers the question of why people almost never suspect a sociopath serial killer until the body count goes up way too high. With no offense to Anthony Hopkins performance in the series about the psychologist gone murderer, real psychopathic serial killers rarely act like Hannibal Lecter from Silence of the Lambs in real life - they are much more likely to look like Miranda: likable, charming, a bit odd, but nothing more. The movie portrays all these qualities in a very subtle, very cinematic fashion, which works very well: it allows the viewer to profile Miranda, like a detective, which makes "Return to Sender" that much more great of a thriller. We know something is coming, but we would never see it. This is why sociopaths are so dangerous, and "Return to Sender" does a grade A job at explaining it.