Return to Sender (1963) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Poor story, good film.
robin-moss216 March 2013
When a film is made very cheaply and within an extremely tight shooting schedule, the result is often embarrassing to watch. If such a film is adapted from a story by a much respected author, the narrative may hold the audience's attention even though the film has been badly made. Return To Sender reverses this expectation. Despite having been made in 20 days on a minimal budget, Return To Sender is a well made film with a sloppy narrative, based on a story by Edgar Wallace.

A corporate fraudster is arrested for stealing a large sum of money from his partners. He is informed that a particularly brilliant and persistent barrister will lead the prosecution against him. To undermine the credibility of the barrister, the fraudster engages the services of a sleazy individual who specialises in dirty tricks and smear tactics. The plan is set in motion but the fraudster intends to twist it to ruin both the barrister and the scheme's architect.

The central premise of Return To Sender does not make sense because evidence in a case is obtained by the police, not the prosecuting barrister. The story is further weakened by relying on two totally implausible coincidences and the final nail in the coffin is that the fraudster has no reason to betray the man he has hired.

Despite the very poor material, Return To Sender is an enjoyable movie. Most of the acting is quite good and it is probable that with a longer shooting schedule, the acting would have been better still. Geoffrey Keen and Nigel Davenport were two ultra professional actors and both give excellent performances. William Russell is consistently interesting as the seemingly unemotional black arts practitioner. The exuberantly feminine Yvonne Romain overplays her role slightly. It would have been better if she had not delivered her lines so forcefully and had spoken a little more slowly, but she is so good-looking that many viewers will not care!

The camera work is admirable. As is so often the case in films shot very quickly, few camera set-up were used, obliging the actors to move about within the compositions.

Return To Sender is today almost forgotten but it is still worth watching despite the weak story line.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Worth seeing!
JohnHowardReid23 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Producer: Jack Greenwood. Merton Park Studios. Never theatrically released in the USA. U.K. release through Warner-Pathé/Anglo Amalgamated: 30 June 1963. Australian release through British Empire Films: 14 July 1967 (sic). 5,486 feet. 61 minutes. (Censored by at least 120 feet in Australia).

SYNOPSIS: Number 26 of the 50-picture Merton Park "Edgar Wallace" series, this one tells "the story of the ugly events behind the scenes during the preparation of a legal case against a big-time property swindler." (Film Review).

NOTES: Like the producers of the RegalScope series of supporting features in the United States, the British makers of the "Edgar Wallace" pictures drew their directors from three different streams, namely from the ranks of veteran quota-quickie artists, film editors and television directors. You would imagine that the film editors would provide the most exciting entries; but, as occurred in exactly similar circumstances with RegalScope, the long-experienced movie editors on the whole disappointed.

Gordon Hales' record marks him as one of Britain's most distinguished film editors. Here is just a partial list of his credits for film editing: The Seventh Veil (1946), Dear Murderer (1947), Miranda (1948), The Lost People (1949), So Long at the Fair (1950), The Clouded Yellow (1951), The Long Memory (1952), The Village (1953), Father Brown (1954), The Doctor's Dilemma (1958), The Summer of the 17th Doll (1959), Village of the Damned (1960), £20,000 Kiss (1963), The War Lover (1963), The Countess from Hong Kong (1967), Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed (1969).

With achievements like this-So Long at the Fair, The Long Memory and Father Brown would have to rank among the One Hundred Best Edited Movies of All Time-we were all looking forward to Hales' debut as a director, even if only as artist-in-charge of a "B" series quickie. Unfortunately, aside from a commendable passion for placing his actors (especially when they're talking) at a considerable distance from the camera (the reverse of the close-up/close-up TV approach), there is nothing particularly distinguished about his handling.

Hales directed only one more film, a featurette in the Edgar Lustgarten "Scotland Yard" series called Undesirable Neighbour (1963) before returning to film editing full-time. COMMENT: Second only to Conan Doyle in the mystery/suspense field in his day, Edgar Wallace has had more ups and down than a rollercoaster in public popularity. He achieved his highest peaks of success thirty years after his death, namely in the 1960s. Since then, interest in his work has undergone a gradual but steady decline. That's a shame, because all the movies (especially the German pictures) based on Wallace's stories have much to offer.

This well-acted thriller incorporates some nice twists in a plot that maintains the interest strongly throughout (if we accept a couple of outrageous co-incidences). And production values are much higher than most of the other entries in the Merton Park series.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
"Take a walk in the park. Take the starch out of your system"
hwg1957-102-26570414 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
A man awaiting trial Dino Steffano tries to discredit the prosecuting counsel Robert Lindley by using the services of an amoral fixer Mike Cochrane, but things are not what they seem. Filmed in the Merton Park studios low budget efficient manner and filled with good dialogue this keeps one's interest throughout. The plot perhaps is a little confusing and there are some unlikely twists but it is entertaining.

The cast is a good one with Nigel Davenport as the shady Steffano, Geoffrey Keen as the untouchable Lindley, William Russell as the cold Cochrane and Yvonne Romain and Jennifer Daniel as the two women caught in the meshes of the conspiracy. Bert Mason as usual provides crisp and clean cinematography. One of the better ones in the Edgar Wallace series from Anglo-Amalgamated.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Incomprehensible plot, but worth watching
lucyrfisher2 June 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I'd spoiler the plot, but I never understood what was going on. Everybody is cheating everybody. Everybody's wicked plans are a front for some different wicked plans.

Nigel Davenport in a moustache is a smooth, softly spoken villain. He's so softly spoken that I can't hear half he says. Besides, he intimidates people by never moving his face. It turns out both femme fatales are in love with him. His sidekick is effectively played.

I liked the shots of the jazz club, and the fact that the anti-hero, Mike Cochrane, drinks nothing stronger than milk.

Somewhere in there is a plot to discredit a barrister by means of a photoshopped image that never gets used. And then they're going to burn down a boathouse. It all makes perfect sense.

William Russell is effective as the amoral fixer who never moves his face. He stares people in the eye without blinking, too. But he's rather boyish and likeable and doesn't get either of the girls.

There's some hoopdedoo about writing letters to yourself and getting them sent back from Zurich, and puzzlement about who worked the Zurich end.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Return to the writing department for a better script.
mark.waltz1 December 2023
Warning: Spoilers
A convoluted crime drama of corporate intrigue isnt very good, even with the presence of veteran British character actor Nigel Davenport as an embezzler whose sole hope of getting away with his crime is to get the goods on the prosecutor. Not a bad premise as far as the story goes, but you'd need a master's degree in business administration to understand half of what's going on.

Yvonne Romain is alluring as far as the young leading lady with the exception of her chirpy voice. William Russell, as the professional blackmailed, and Geoffrey Keene as the prosecutor, are basically just there, doing their best to just remember their lines and not bump into the furniture. The location footage is interesting, but pretty typical of the Edgar Wallace series. Obviously the writers were trying really hard to fool the audience with a complex structure they consider genius, but the only result is the audience becoming desperately bored.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed