Bad for Each Other

Bad for Each Other

1953 "He takes your life in his hands!"
Bad for Each Other
Bad for Each Other

Bad for Each Other

5.8 | 1h23m | NR | en | Drama

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

View More
AD

WATCH FREEFOR 30 DAYS

All Prime Video
Cancel anytime

Watch Now
5.8 | 1h23m | NR | en | Drama | More Info
Released: December. 24,1953 | 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

Cast

Charlton Heston , Lizabeth Scott , Dianne Foster

Director

Walter Holscher

Producted By

Columbia Pictures ,

AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.

Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

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).
secondtake Bad for Each Other (1953)Charlton Heston gets a bad rap sometimes--maybe that's what you expect after "Planet of the Apes"--but here he is the charming, confident, larger than life young man that made him famous. Yes, it's a B-movie, but it's a very strong performance for Heston and he is surrounded by a cast that is decent (Lizabeth Scott not at her best, which is saying a lot) to terrific (Ray Collins as the big business power guy he plays so well). The "business" at the center is a coal mine in a small Pennsylvania town, and Heston plays a doctor, Tom Owen, getting out of the military in a pseudo-noir kind of echo. Owen's dilemma is a worldly one--whether to doctor rich old women with frivolous pains or to work for the miners in their lower class afflictions.And it is Lizabeth Scott, a pampered (and unabashedly pampered) rich girl who snags our hero, and so against his initial instinct Heston goes the rich and lazy way. But of course the coal mining town is all around him, and reminders pop up now and then. It's a great problem for a movie, and it's worked out with fairly predictable logic, so there is nothing to really fault here. Except that very predictability. Even Scott is a bit bland, not really getting to run her coolness to true ice. Some of the side characters are well developed, surprisingly (a "good" doctor untainted by money and an old woman who is wiser than she lets on at first), and director Irving Rapper (who should have been a music star in the 1990s with a name like that) makes it pop pretty well.The less than sterling reputation of this movie is unwarranted, but it may be a result of higher expectations than this kind of movie deserves. Yes, the plot is boilerplate stuff, but so are half the movie plots out there. And Heston is sort of terrific. Yes, he plays a type, and he doesn't give the angst some other actor might, but I don't think the character, Dr. Owen, was an angst-y kind of guy. The way he wrestles with things is believable.The cinematography by Franz Planer is better than I'd expected (the name didn't ring a bell) and there are small sterling moments, the camera moving around a group of people at a table, or across a wrought iron screen as the two leads start to hit it off. Nice stuff. The title is wrong, by the way--it's only Scott's character who is bad for the doctor, not the other way around. She's not about to be affected by anyone, especially a handsome young ex-GI who is such easy prey.
oldblackandwhite Before watching this movie, I bethought myself, with Charlton Heston, Liz Scott, and Ray Collins, presented in early '50's beautiful black and white, it can't be all bad. How wrong I was. Bad for Each other was just bad for viewing. The cinematography was gorgeous, all right, and the cast was good, all right, but both were wasted on this movie.I will not waste time on the plot. Too much ink has already been spilled going over its standard "The Citadel" pattern doctor-torn-between-being- noble-helper-of-mankind-and-making-money story line. It has been used over and over again because it works well. In Hollywood when they found a horse that would run, they just went ahead and rode him to death. And that's not so bad. But this was a very poor treatment of the familiar story.The development of the story was incompetent and contrived. The story had so many plot threads, it would have taken a two and a half hour movie to cover them all, but this second feature programmer was only 84 minutes. We were led to expect that the X-rays of the miners' lungs displaying some hard-to-diagnose disease, shown to Dr. Heston by both the old coal mine doctor (Rhys Williams) and his idealistic young assistant (Arthor Franz) would turn out important in the denouement. Likewise the issue of whether Heston's character intended to pay off his late brother's debts. But there was no payoff on either. Both were left hanging at the end. People, including her own father, kept telling Heston how bad spoiled society dame Liz Scott had been for all men and how she would ruin him. But he seemed to be developing all of his bad attitude on his own without her help. Her attempts to manipulate him had little effect. In fact he seemed to dominate her.The characterization in general was very bad. The noble poor -- Heston's mother (Mildred Dunnock), the dedicated nurse (Dianne Foster), and Franz's idealistic young doctor -- all came off like doctrinaire commie stereotypes. All of the rich people were likewise portrayed like socialist models of capitalistic pigs, the exception being Ray Collins' mine owner, who showed a little troubled noblesse oblige. I'm not suggesting it was made from a socialist point of view. I'm not sure the movie even had a point of view. It was just crude. If the commies couldn't do any better than that in the propaganda department, no wonder they lost the Cold War!The cruelest disappoint of all awaited us Liz Scott fans. What a waste of that dynamite figure, that wicked, toothy leer, those vampire eyes, and that awesome ability to be bad,bad, bad! So bad that in another, much better, movie Too Late for Tears she even made Dan Duryea look like a half -decent guy by comparison! She never got to be really bad in this movie, just a bit spoiled and selfish. I kept waiting for her to shoot someone, poison someone, double-cross someone, or just run off with the plumber. Any of the above would have considerably improved this movie. Unfortunately nothing so interesting happened.No, Liz wasn't bad, but Bad for Each Other was.
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!