film

Master of The Love Letter

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

Let’s take a break from my discussions of software and Project Management to talk about the 2026 Masters of the Universe film and why it has artistic legitimacy. There, that’s not what you expected, was it?

So the film had it’s challenges. It had sort of OK reviews. It didn’t seem to quite make the money it needs. It had Jared Leto, which is inadvisable on all occasions. But also I had friends who saw it and quite enjoyed it. What’s my take?

The film is actually quite enjoyable. It’s breezy, it looks good (though some CGI seems to have been added quickly), the cast is absolutely on, it’s very colorful and fun. Honestly it was a popcorn movie without the sense of getting tossed into a huge extended universe, even if some elements hint at such ambition.

What really stood out to me was how it was an absolutely love letter to the original series – one I am ironically familiar with due to cultural impact and remakes as the original came after my time. It looks cartoony. It’s loaded with sincere weirdness. Skeletor is overdramatic, a theater kid with dark occult power. It even has a kind of early 80’s vibe to the music and the credits. There’s no way this could be made without people who cared and did their research.

It’s also filled with plenty of extrapolations and little details. The goofy names of the heroic Masters are not their actually names – they’re what a young Prince Adam nicknamed them (before he got stranded on Earth). Refugee Adam, stuck on earth, grows up to be an HR professional – leveraging his genial and kind nature. There are deep cut highly obscure characters – you may not care about someone called Goat-Man but he looks like a badass Gwar extra.

The movie is first and foremost a love letter to the original – and I think that’s where it has artistic legitimacy.

The movie takes a toy marketing commercial with a plot and brings it to life. It has a feel of someone playing with their action figures, with wild action and silly and fun twists. It doesn’t shy away from any of the strangeness it embraces it. Wrapping the plot around a young Adam, who remembers this fantastical world but seems crazy for telling people about it adds a kind of longing to the whole affair.

Did it need to go to theaters? No. Did it need to be an attempt to launch more films? No. Did it need Jared Leto? No, he’s a creep. I think it could have been done for streaming services and be done with it.

But watching it, feeling that love and affection, feeling that sincerity? There was something artistically worthy here. Even if it’s based on a “toyetic cartoon” there was something there.

I think now I have to consider the “Love Letter” it’s own meta-genre. And I may need to rethinking other shows and films and books.

Steven Savage

Fackham Hall: Learn From The Stupid

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

So I recently saw Fackham Hall. It’s a movie that was advertised as sort of “Naked Gun But For Stuffy British Stuff.” I am pleased to report I enjoyed it, it was also very stupid, and there’s actually something to learn from it. Enough that I want to share.

So first of all, if you wonder “will I like it,” I’d say that Fackham Hall is actually in the vein of the 2025 Deathstalker film that was an homage to old direct-to video fantasy. There is an intended audience, and if you are in that audience, you will enjoy it. If you are not, don’t bother. This is a film for people who’ve watched a lot of Stuffy British Stuff and have a sense of humor about it.

Now when it comes to a comedy the question is are the jokes any good? Fackham Hall has a lot of jokes in it, of extremely varied quality, but you won’t be lacking jokes. Not all of them are good, I’d say that the overall humor is “OK,” there’s plenty of laughs. There’s an over-reliance on crudity for the most part that I found offputting, but there are plenty of actually good jokes.

Two things stand out from the humor. The first is that there are jokes where the setup is actually part of the humor, where you realize how far the movie went for a joke or a sudden case where one thing suddenly becomes funny due to one tiny action. The second is there are a few scenes that authentically stand out, most notable an extended dialogue joke in the vein of “Who’s on first” that had me in tears. There is effort here, albeit it makes some of the low-effort jokes more obvious.

Fackham Hall does have two larger lessons, a minor one and a major one I want to explore. These are enough that they provide lessons for other comedies.

The minor lesson is that Fackham Hall actually has a plot that drives the story forward, if erratically. The Davenport family risks losing their beloved estate unless their daughter marries the cousin due to inherit it – and the disruption of a roguish young visitor and an eventual murder add chaos to the countdown. Some characters have their own concerns and sidestories. There’s enough here to power a general movie, and that gives the film plenty of energy, even if the actual plot could have been used more in the jokes.

The major lesson is the cast and the acting. For all it’s silliness the cast acts as seriously as if they were in a dramatic film. It’s not deadpan, it’s a talented lot of actors acting as if this is a film of drama and danger and intrigue and love. Watching people do the stupidest things with great sincerity and gravitas takes the film farther and makes even lame jokes actually funnier.

Thomasin McKenzie and Ben Radcliffe take on the role of inevitable lovers, and show actual chemistry and charm together. Emma Laird, who’s character’s marriage shenanigans drive the early part of the film has a scene of emotional breakdown where she is crying and screaming while also upending the common tropes of said scene. Tim McMullan plays Cyril, the family butler with absolute seriousness while also being the butt of a movie-long joke he leans into and keeps going.

The absolute standout is Damian Lewis as the Davenport family patriarch, Humphrey. Lewis invests this somewhat befuddled and inbred character with charm and sensitivity, making him actually likeable. There’s even a scene where he expresses his fatherly love to one of his daughters that is touching. Jokes be damned, Lewis was acting and nothing stopped him, not even the script.

What made Fackham Hall work was – ironically – what makes a good movie. Give it a plot and get actors who will act. It can even elevate some poor jokes or missed opportunities. I enjoyed this enough that I actually got curious to see the actors in other works, especially Mr. Lewis.

It’s not every day you can take lessons in comedy from a film that includes J.R.R. Tolkien farting, but here you go. My kudos to the cast.

Steven Savage

Superman 2025: Take All The Swings

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

(Yep, I’m taking a break from talking about technology to talk about culture, which I probably should do more . . .)

Superman 2025 was something I wasn’t enthused about, since I’m sort of tired of superhero blockbusters. Then I saw the commercials with Krypto the Superdog and had to admit I was going to see it because that was pretty bold. Superman, whatever it would be, clearly wasn’t as ground through the marketing mill as many of the recent Marvel movies. Again, dog in a cape.

And after seeing Superman I am pleased to say it is not only good, it is one of the most, if not the most comic book movie I’ve seen. It is, much like it’s titular main character, absolutely honest about what it is, without shame or irony – but also without apology. Superman is about a man who’s just trying to be a good guy, and it’s a film trying to be a good comic book movie.

The film opens both in media res but in universe res, with a quick text intro that manages to recap the setting in a few sentences then Superman shows up with the stakes already high. It tells you to hold on to your seats, because the film isn’t really going to hold your hand but just dive right in and keep going. This means we are spared the inevitable origin story, and the film also trusts you to pick up the details even if you’re not deep into comics lore (and there’s just enough the uninformed can get most of it).

And the comics elements come thick and fast and never let up. The movie takes a lot of swings with DC continuity, and the various characters and elements of the world keep coming until over halfway into the film. The film doesn’t hit out of the park every time, to continue the swing metaphor, but it doesn’t miss anything either. Some elements of this huge comic book movie work better or are done better than others, but nothing fails – and when the story connects it connects.

There is a lot. There are multiple superheroes. There is a kaiju. There is politics. There is romance. There are twists. There are robots. There is, once again, a superpowered dog. There’s also a lot that may seem painfully timely, but some of it is only timely because we have to keep relearning certain lessons.

This alchemical mix of comic book elements could not have worked without an absolutely stellar cast. Every single member of the cast is on, handling their roles with sincerity and enthusiasm and that sells all the dense elements of the movie. David Corenswet totally steps into the role of Superman/Clark Kent, he lives it. Rachel Brosnan’s Lois Lane is strong, passionate, undaunted, and there’s a bit of her backstory that she brings to life (no spoilers). Nicholas Hoult’s Lex Luthor glowers and chews scenery as a charismatic utter a-hole. Edi Gathegi as Mister Terrific is so good that he’s a man playing the protagonist in another protagonist’s movies. I could go on, but they’re all good.

Wait, I have to shout out Neva Howell and Pruitt Taylor Vince and the Kents, who are one of the most believable takes on the couple I’ve seen. One moment they’re funny, the other they’re deep, and in all cases they’re parents. OK I’m done.

Superman 2025 has the right people to pull off all of the wild elements it tries to incorporate, and that’s why it does it successfully, if not perfectly. The film can be slightly uneven, because comic books themselves can swing between the fantastic and the mundane, but it never loses balance. Like a juggler, it keeps a lot in the air, motion itself being fuel for the spectacle.

I am still tired of big superhero blockbusters and huge big-budget movies dominating culture. But Superman felt so honest, so sincere, it was a breath of fresh air. It was a vision of Superman that felt true to the character and the ideas behind him, and it’s worth seeing – and learning from.

Get the right people, take the swing, do the right thing.

Steven Savage