Fackham Hall (2025) Movie Review: A laugh-a-minute comedy technique mines humor from peculiar British tropes

Share it

Comedy movies have become rare these days, but you’ll hear this exact statement from two sets of people. One would discuss the recent decline in laugh-out-loud comedies, where comedy isn’t the focus, but the drama. The other would reminisce about the good ol’ days when comedy gave them an excuse to be bigoted without the fear of consequence. They could be openly sexist, racist, and homophobic as comedians instead of pseudo-political figures as they are now. No matter what, the fact remains that we don’t see comedies as much as dramas with flourishes of humor. You’ll notice similar arguments against FX’s ‘The Bear,’ infamously nominated in the comedy category. That’s why ‘Fackham Hall’ feels like a breath of fresh air, despite the obscenity hinted at in its title.

High On Films in collaboration with Avanté

Jim O’Hanlon, who has directed episodes from Andy Wolton’s ‘Trying’ and Sharon Horgan and Rob Delaney’s ‘Catastrophe,’ directs this film with a significantly different comedic tone. The story is set somewhere in the early 20th century (considering the presence of ‘struggling’ writer J. R. R. Tolkien) and centres around an aristocratic UK family, who don’t seem outright repulsive. That’s why people may find parallels to ‘Downton Abbey,’ a famously ‘British’ show that follows a similar set of characters and their posh lives.

Although a riveting melodrama, it doesn’t take any creative risks and maintains a sophisticated tone that people can’t get enough of. Perhaps that’s because the characters’ trivial concerns alleviate the stress of their own high-stakes troubles. Yet, their fascination feels odd in today’s climate, filled with eat-the-rich-themed projects seething with anger against the wealthy ignorants.

The White Lotus’ famously satirized the shallowness of uber-rich people’s lives, while inadvertently turning into an aspirational tale, enticing people to earn enough money so they can enjoy the riches as its characters do. ‘Fackham Hall’ doesn’t go on that route. Although farcical in its approach, it is more invested in the silly puns and slapstick humor than in the brutal scrutiny of systemic issues. That’s why, instead of the Mike White show, it’s tonally closer to ‘The Naked Gun,’ which doesn’t concern itself with any cerebral undertones. What you see is what you get, which makes this feel as refreshing as the Liam Neeson film. O’Hanlon’s film celebrates similarly unabashed silliness that has become common on social media but uncommon in movies.

Speaking about the narrative, the film follows the Davenports, an aristocratic family living in a lavish mansion. Lord (Damian Lewis), the family patriarch, who is said to have fought in the war, has predictable concerns about his daughters. He wants them to get married, and so does his wife, Lady Davenport (Katherine Waterston). That leaves their daughters, Poppy (Emma Laird) and Rose (Thomasin McKenzie), being nothing more than financial propositions for the family to maintain their wealth and status. With that setup, the script follows the same set of narrative cliches that it aims to mock. We see daughters falling in love with underprivileged men, a nightmare scenario for their parents.

Tom Felton plays Archibald, a pompous brat, while Ben Radcliffe plays Eric, a charming young man who becomes Archibald’s adversary in marrying a Davenport daughter. The script doesn’t lean on the love-triangle aspect of their equation. Instead, it stays focused on the blossoming romance between Rose and Eric, which drives the story. Their characters are archetypes with little to no emotional depth, but that’s the whole point. The film is a farce on these tropes, not its real-life inspirations. So, it isn’t remotely concerned with being cerebral, nor should it be.

In fact, the film works because it doesn’t pretend to be anything more than a collection of puns and gags. It relentlessly subjects us to its jokes, triggering laughter almost every single minute. No moment is without some form of idiocy, but it’s clever in executing that. There’s one scene where a character tries to save their own life by elaborate methods that would quite obviously put it at risk. Yet, the execution is so good that you forgive its overall predictable nature. Another clever decision is casting actors who are known for their dramatic roles, as they play every scene with such sincerity that it alone makes it funny.

In a scene, Waterston delivers one of the silliest puns you can think of, but the sheer surprise on her face tickles your funny bone. The same is the case with Lewis and McKenzie, the latter of whom has rarely gotten a chance to showcase her comedic chops. Lewis nails his bits of Chaplin-esque physical comedy. Yet it’s McKenzie who becomes the heart of the film, bearing the burden of the central drama while delivering her innately comedic dialogue with equal skill and conviction. Anna Maxwell Martin is another highlight from the cast, reliably impressive in performing the film’s wry humor.

While all that is true, the fact remains that its humor isn’t as rare as it used to be amid the endless supply of social media reels. Some of its gags may be classified as dad jokes, while others may feel overdone, thus stale. Hence, the mileage may vary depending on the viewer. What remains impressive nonetheless are the performances, if not the production design, which compels you stay with the characters and concern yourself with their predictable conflicts. It is plenty of fun simply due to the actors’ commitment to these roles, even if the script doesn’t break any new ground. The silver lining is that the film isn’t dull even for a minute, even if the jokes may hit or miss.