Spencer Tracy was getting quite old when he made this one. He can still show some power here in his lead role as a stubborn judge with the young girl friend. He does a good job with a challenging script. Lana Turner as the love interest is very effective here. Considering the film's script, she does well too.There are sparks in the cast besides. I think in this case Tracy deserved better script. That seemed to hurt him in his last films. Are there better Tracy films? Yes, but this one is pretty good.Judge Timberlane may not chop down trees but he does Dispense Jusice with authority from the bench.

To enjoy this film, you really have to suspend disbelief. I can often times do this, but if you just can't believe in the possibility of pairing an ordinary-looking middle-aged guy (Tracy) with an extremely sexy young woman (Turner), then you should probably just skip the film. In fact, the people around this strange pairing also have trouble accepting this marriage. My problem wasn't just the age differences, but the personality differences--I just couldn't understand why she was attracted to him (I have my suspicions why HE would be interested). The story itself apart from that is good and I like that Zachary Scott is there for support--he is great in his caddish roles. Not a bad but not an exceptional film--but sure to please fans of Tracy.

Spencer Tracy is a hard-nosed small town judge who meets feisty, attractive young Lana Turner in his courtroom one day and finds himself smitten; they date and he soon proposes, but there's an immediate problem: Lana's from the poor side of town and doesn't have the judge's class (she bowls and plays baseball) while all the judge's high society friends mingle at cocktail parties and gossip on the phone. From the way the film is written and directed, we are to assume Lana is really benefiting from this marriage, but she's never as happy as she was in those early scenes of "poverty" and, worse, she never returns to her roots, just goes around in circles finding the judge's money, power and friends a chore. The script is actually rather condescending in its approach to Turner's character; it has been written by people with money who have no idea what the "poor side of town" even looks like, and the filmmakers can't even grasp the fact that Turner (and maybe even judge Tracy) would be much happier away from all the champagne and telephone gossips and get involved in some low-income fun (like bowling!). Instead of focusing on the class-issue, they throw another man in Lana's path, which is the oldest issue in the book. This movie doesn't have any courage, and only the early courting scenes have spark. Tracy and Turner do all they can, but it's a lost cause.

As much as I love Spencer Tracy, there wasn't much he could do with this boring, predictable, overly preachy script. Not to mention how ironic it is to hear him expound the virtues of fidelity when he had numerous affairs, the most famous being Katharine Hepburn, while still married.Lana Turner is lovely, but I just couldn't get into the story line. I think it started out as a good idea: Cass Timberlane (Tracy) marries a younger woman (Turner) from the supposed "wrong side of the tracks", much to the chagrin of his snobby friends. Can they make the relationship work or not? If they would have developed the story more, and preached less, I think it may have worked. Instead it is just a two-hour sermon, more or less.Well, at least there is a cute kitty included in the picture.