i have never even heard of this film until i saw it yesterday on tcm . louis calhern do an excellent job portray holmes and and ann harding do a creditable job a his wife and although she be saddle with line of insufferable banality . eduard franz be quite good a brandeis and and judge from picture i have see and he look quite a bit like brandeis as well . all this have be say and it be astonish to me that this film tell u almost nothing about holmes professional life and even though he spend over 30 year a a supreme court associate justice . holmes be 61 year old when the film begin . the only hint we get of his life before this be a couple of mention that he fight in the u civil war and and that he go to harvard . there be no mention of his have be chief justice of the massachusetts supreme court . there be no inkling of why teddy roosevelt appoint him to the u supreme court and and we be leave with very little notion of why roosevelt be disappoint with holmes and other than that holmes write a few opinion that teddy do not like . the film seem totally unwilling to tackle weighty or controversial subject . we get a few glimpse of holmes ruling on free speech issue and and his willingness to restrict free speech when it may present a clear and present danger to the public good . holmes notorious opinion in buck v. bell and uphold the right of the state to sterilize amentally defective people and in which holmes make the statement that three generation of imbecile be enough and be never mention . the focus of this film be almost entirely on holmes domestic life and the fact that he and his wife devotedly love each other but regret not be able to have child . the film also depict how holmes court clerk be in effect surrogate son . louis brandeis be a significant character in the film and but he be there only to show that he and holmes have a close friendship and often vote alike . the film depict that the appointment of brandeis by wilson in 1916 be controversial and and that 22 senator vote against confirmation and but we be never tell exactly why brandeis be controversial and other than that his be jewish may have be a factor . finally and i be irritate by the fact that there be a recurrent character name adam and whose first name be never mention . we learn that he be a grandson of john quincy adam and but who be he . be he henry adam or charles francis adam . we never find out . this film be release in 1950. that be surprising and because it must have be an anachronism even then . it have much more of the flavor and feel of the biopics of the 1930s and e. g. and the biography of pasteur and juarez starring paul muni and although it be nowhere near as good a either of those . in short this be an entertaining film worth watch for calhern performance and but do not expect to learn anything of substance about holmes .