Bad for Each Other

1953 "He takes your life in his hands!"
5.8| 1h23m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 24 December 1953 Released
Producted By: Columbia Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A doctor returned from the Korean War must choose between joining a glamorous practice and helping the poor.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Columbia Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Scanialara You won't be disappointed!
IslandGuru Who payed the critics
Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some
Dorathen Better Late Then Never
Martin Teller A once-idealistic doctor from a small mining town sells his integrity for a big city practice treating wealthy dowagers. If you said to yourself "That sounds like an incredibly dull premise for a noir," give yourself a gold star. Nothing to see here but a bunch of heavy-handed speechifying and simplistic class distinctions. I've never cared for Charlton Heston (with the possible exception of TOUCH OF EVIL) and here he does a lot of jutting out his chin and looking handsome and delivering his lines with zero conviction. Lizabeth Scott is an actress I run hot and cold on... in this case, quite cold. She's entirely uninteresting as a "bad girl" whose primary vice is a mild materialist streak. I was also rather annoyed by Mildred Dunnock, playing Heston's hand-wringing mother. The script is just awful and photographically, the film is a dud, with a few instances of noticeably poor shot continuity (not a deal-breaker, but a pet peeve of mine). There's no tension, no real conflict, no doubt about how everything's going to turn out okay in the end. Bad for you, bad for me, bad for everyone.
vincentlynch-moonoi Usually my rating comes pretty close to the "group" rating here. But this time I must disagree and give this film a considerably higher "7".I was not expecting much, partially because since Charlton Heston's NRA rants he had fallen out of favor with me, although I still believe his performance in Ben-Hur was one of the great performances in cinematic history. But there have been few other films I really enjoyed him in. But, Heston's performance here is top notchAs one other reviewer here pointed out, it isn't far into the film before we know that the basic plot is that a doctor who is tempted to a rich practice for hypochondriacs will, eventually, return to his true calling. Okay, but then again, we figure out the gist of most movies pretty quickly. What makes a film interesting is the way it gets to a conclusion we've already figured out. On the one hand, some aspects of the story -- such as the coal mining aspect -- are a little different. There are also some aspects of the film that just don't ring true...such as the mother's reluctance to have her son be successful; that is a bit overdone. And, I don't think the screenwriters did Lizabeth Scott's role any favors; she's too callous. But, at least she's interesting here. Dianne Foster as a dedicated nurse was good, and it's always nice to see Mildred Dunnock (here as the mother; too bad the role was not more realistic). Arthur Franz is excellent as a dedicated young doctor. It's always a plus to have veteran character actor Ray Collins in a film, and he is wonderful as ever here. Same for Marjorie Rambeau as a rich, matronly type. Lester Matthews and Rhys Williams do fine as a slick city-type doctor versus a country doctor.So, from my perspective, this is a pretty decent movie. Perhaps not one for the DVD shelf, but definitely worth a watch (or two...as I did).
MartinHafer This film finds Charlton Heston a career military doctor. He's a colonel and has come home on leave. However, two things make him reassess whether to continue in this military career--his deceased brother and Lizabeth Scott. As for the brother, he too had grown up in this Pennsylvania coal town but living the high life was so important that he created a lot of debts and died owing a lot of people. Heston felt an obligation to pay off these debts. The other reason was the odd character played by Lizabeth Scott. She plays a very sophisticated but highly controlling woman--twice divorced. Shortly after meeting Heston, she decided to make him into the man she wanted him to be--in a swanky private practice and with his manhood under her firm control! Considering how obviously manipulative and controlling she is, it seems amazing that Heston would be interested in her...though in real life I've seen people make similar insane decisions with who they marry. It seems obvious to everyone EXCEPT Heston that she's just no good--a woman who will crush his spirit and emasculate him. At the same time, Heston's new assistant has a lot going for her--quite the looker and very sweet (Dianne Foster). How he could fall for Scott is sure a puzzler and you're rooting for him to wake up and notice Foster! You just wonder if she'd have him now that he's so focused on monetary success.So does everything work out fine for Charlton? Well, if it did, then there'd be no reason for this film! First, while this other doc was great with schmoozing and putting on an image that the rich folks loved, he was incompetent. Naturally, this had a big impact on Heston--how could he continue a partnership with this man--especially when the guy wasn't at all repentant about his lack of skills. As for Scott, she's everything you assume she is--an albatross around Charlton's neck! But, when Heston is called to the nearby coal mine when there's a cave-in, his moment of decision is at hand.Overall, a very good film though I think they made Scott too obviously selfish and annoying. Had they toned her down just a bit, it would have improved the film and made it not quite so obvious. I also felt a bit annoyed that the film seemed to imply that being a "society doctor" is a bad thing is a bit of an overstatement. They seem to be saying that Heston should "stick with his own social class" as well as promotes the myth that rich folks are all hypochondriacs. Not all rich people are bad and not all poor folks are noble! As for me, I say good for Heston if he's able to make a go of this practice after spending so many years in the service! After all, SOMEBODY needs to treat rich people! Also, I found it interesting that Scott was used in the film as she really did grow up in the region featured in the film! This Scranton-born girl didn't have to stretch very far in the accent department!
bkoganbing In between his two DeMille blockbusters, Charlton Heston did a bunch of films of varying quality, some for Paramount and some as a loan out. For this medical soap opera, Heston went to Columbia to appear opposite Lizabeth Scott. Bad For Each Other is kind of like Not As A Stranger in reverse. If you'll recall in that one Robert Mitchum had nurse/wife Olivia DeHavilland, but had a roving eye for the sultry socialite Gloria Grahame. In this one Heston starts out going big time for Scott, but there is also idealistic nurse Dianne Foster in the picture as well.Heston's character is an army doctor on leave, fresh from Korea and in Coalville, Pennsylvania to visit his mother, Mildred Dunnock. He gets a nice offer from the town doctor Rhys Williams to move in and gradually takeover his practice. But when Scott comes with a better offer in more attractive packaging, Heston's libido takes over and he leaves the army to work in a high priced clinic for the rich and powerful in Pittsburgh.It's not just hormones talking here, the only thing about Coalville Heston liked as a kid was saying goodbye to it as he didn't want to wind up in the mines like most of the town. There's a cave-in at the mine for a climax and I think if you've seen enough medical dramas you have some idea where this is going. The stars and supporting cast are all comfortable in the parts they are playing, but no new ground is broken in Bad For Each Other.