Infectiously entertaining romp featuring a cast having a whale of a time overdoes the jokey tone.

I am an unapologetic fan of the 1987 Masters of the Universe movie.

Yeah, I know it isn’t very good but nostalgia hits hard and the video tape – look it up kids – of the Dolph Lundgren-led adventure was worn out in my house.

It’s incredible that we’ve had to wait just shy of 40 years for another cinematic trip to Eternia .

But after many failed attempts to get another take on the hit 80s cartoon off the ground, Amazon MGM Studios have finally made the seemingly impossible happen.

Nicholas Galitzine stars as Adam , who discovers a secret legacy as the prince of an alien planet and looks to recover a magical sword and return home to protect his kingdom.

First thing’s first; Masters of the Universe 2026 is a blast. Bright, breezy – despite a two-hour-plus running time – and brimming with heart and hijinks, the flick should go down a storm with audiences, particularly those familiar with all things He-Man .

Director Travis Knight nailed 80s-flavoured action with 2018’s Bumblebee and he does a very good job here too.

Unlike the 1987 version, we spend most of the time in Eternia rather than Earth and all manner of colourful characters and Asgardian -like shiny locations bring the world to luscious life.

Galitzine excels as Adam , particularly during his fish-out-of-water routine, although his over-reliance on sensitivity feels very un- He-Man -like.

The film in general is too jokey. Don’t get me wrong, most of the humour lands but when even the otherwise intimidating Skeletor (a revelling-in-villainy Jared Leto) is aiming for laughs it takes away from the peril our heroes should be immersed in.

The story is also very reminiscent of Flash Gordon – complete with the presence of Queen on the soundtrack – and some of the CGI is distractingly weak.

Masters of the Universe 2026 doesn’t quite have all of the power, but everyone involved has a whale of a time and the infectious entertainment is sure to have youngsters repeatedly watching it on video… erm, sorry, via streaming services.

● How do you think the new Masters of the Universe compares to the 1987 version?

Pop me an email at ian.bunting@reachplc.com and I will pass on your comments – and any recommendations you have – to your fellow readers.

● Masters of the Universe is showing in cinemas now.

*Don’t miss the latest headlines from around Lanarkshire. Sign up to our newsletters here.

And did you know Lanarkshire Live had its own app? Download yours for free here.

The Pulp Fiction director and the Aussie superstar have been spotted in variuous locations in south Wales for a new movie project

Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino and popstar Kylie Minogue were back in the Welsh capital today as filming continued on a new movie project that has been attracting attention across south Wales.

The pair were seen on Monday, June 22, filming at National Museum Cardiff in Cathays Park, one of Amgueddfa Cymru’s museums, after a weekend of sightings in Porthcawl left locals stunned.

Visitors to the Saltwater Inn in Porthcawl were surprised to see the unlikely duo filming scenes together over the weekend. Footage shared on social media showed Tarantino and Kylie dressed in black, laughing and chatting as though they were old friends. Their characters appeared familiar with one another, lightly touching hands as they laughed together.

According to Nation.Cymru, the scene was reportedly set during a wake. The pair were also said to have filmed a funeral sequence at a church in the nearby village of Newton.

Today’s images from the museum appear to be a continuation of the scenes as they were dressed in the same attire as those filmed in Porthcawl. For the latest TV and showbiz gossip sign up to our newsletter

It was not the first time Tarantino had been spotted in Wales in recent days. BBC reported that the acclaimed director, best known for films including Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill, was seen enjoying a drink with crew members at Cardiff’s Parkgate Hotel on Friday evening.

Kylie, meanwhile, is no stranger to Wales and has previously spoken proudly about her Welsh heritage. Speaking to Carol Vorderman in 2021, the Padam Padam singer revealed that her mother, Carol Jones, was born in Maesteg, while other family members lived in Port Talbot and Bridgend.

The project bringing the pair together is reportedly titled Tangled Up in Blue. According to Variety, the film is being directed by Porthcawl-born filmmaker Jamie Adams, who is known for his Nouvelle Vague-inspired improvised filmmaking style.

The feature is also said to star Jason Isaacs, Allison Williams, Sofia Boutella and RZA. Adams and Tarantino previously worked together on the 2026 drama Only What We Carry, which also featured Simon Pegg and Lizzy McAlpine.

Several Welsh actors are also believed to be involved in the production. Among them is Stella actress Karen Paullada, who recently shared a behind-the-scenes image on Instagram alongside fellow Welsh performers Jules Lewis Jones, Craig Russell and Siwan Morris.

The photograph, which appeared to have been taken inside a church, showed Karen and Jules dressed in smart black clothing. Alongside the image, she wrote: “Awesome filming with @juleslewisjones @craigrussell1977 @morrissiwan and other legends. All steered and put together by the one and only @jdadams1 #filmmaking #indiefilm #movie #film #movies.”

With filming now taking place in Cardiff following scenes shot in Porthcawl and Newton, excitement is continuing to build around the star-studded production and its growing Welsh connections.

WASHINGTON (AP) — National Guard service members and U.S. Park Police were patrolling the deck around the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool on Monday, as Donald Trump’s administration faces a self-imposed deadline to fix a botched renovation and cleaning efforts ahead of the nation’s 250th anniversary celebration.

The patrols come two days after Trump said authorities had made “multiple arrests” of people he insisted were responsible for damage to the peeling coating after an algae bloom occurred. The liner was installed as part of his $14 million-plus project.

The president has confirmed the problems likely require draining the pool again for liner repairs, and he promised a quick fix. But the timeline was not clear Monday, and the administration did not immediately respond to questions about a new round of work. Contractors and federal workers in recent days have been using chemicals and ozone nanobubbles to combat the algae.

Trump pitched the original improvements as intended to clean, beautify and reinforce an iconic site that he said had become dilapidated and dirty because of previous presidents’ neglect. Algae has plagued the pool for a century, and Trump insisted that a newly installed ‘American flag blue’ coating, which he selected himself, would turn the pool into a gleaming expanse along the National Mall.

Yet within weeks of Trump declaring the rehabilitation completed in time for Independence Day, the water was plagued by a vivid green algae bloom that clouded the pool’s coating. An approximately 4 foot-square piece of the liner was observed last Friday to be partially floating in the pool. The Associated Press observed additional pieces in the water Monday.

Via social media, the president has blamed the problems on “SICK, DERANGED PEOPLE!” He asserted Monday on Truth Social that intentional damages include a “300 foot long gash” and that “chemicals have been illegally placed in the water.” A day earlier, Trump posted, “Work will begin immediately on fixing the seriously vandalized Reflecting Pool.”

He has not substantiated those claims, and even if anyone has deliberately peeled the lining, that would not explain the algae bloom that appeared more intensely than what typically occurred before the renovation.

Images showing that Trump’s project apparently backfired boomeranged across social media last week, drawing crowds of onlookers eager to see the effects themselves. An unknown number ended up being detained by federal authorities.

One man arrested was David Hearn, 67, of Bethesda, Maryland. A former Olympic canoe racer, Hearn told The Associated Press that he reached into the pool because he wanted to examine the peeling new coating. He said he briefly touched a chunk that was still attached to the side of the pool, then let go shortly after a park worker told him to. Hearn said he was then detained by National Guard troops and Park Police for five hours before being released Friday night.

“I’m a curious citizen,” Hearn said in a telephone interview. “I reached down to see what it felt like. It was very rubbery.”

The Park Police did not immediately respond Monday to AP’s questions about how many arrests were made and whether any charges had been filed. Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department said Monday that the agency is not involved.

It was not immediately apparent what criminal or civil violation someone might commit reaching into the pool. Trump, in one of his Truth Social posts on the matter, threatened prison time for his unnamed assailants, referencing laws against defacing federal monuments.

___

Barrow reported from Atlanta. Katie Vogel contributed reporting from Washington, D.C.

It worked. It won Labour a landslide and carried Mr Starmer into Downing Street with a 174 seat majority, an extraordinary turnaround after Boris Johnson’s Tory tsunami had swept into corners of the country like the Tees Valley and Durham that the Conservatives had never previously reached and inflicted a historically humiliating defeat on Labour.

Labour leader Keir Starmer holds his party’s 2024 manifesto (Image: PA)

Yet less than two years later, it is all change again. Andy Burnham now looks set to become Britain’s seventh prime minister in 10 years as the country, once a bastion of stability in an ever-changing world, looks increasingly unstable.

Six Prime Ministers resigning in 10 years: Lord David Cameron, Theresa May (Baroness May of Maidenhead), and Boris Johnson, and (bottom row, left to right) Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir StarmerPA Photo. Photo credit should read: Stefan Rousseau/Aaron Chown/Andrew Matthews/James Manning/Kirsty O’Connor/PA Wire (Image: Stefan Rousseau/Aaron Chown/Andrew Matthews/James Manning/Kirsty O’Connor/PA Wire)

Mr Burnham will probably change the Secretary of State for Health for the 10th time in those 10 years – is it any wonder that our NHS is floundering with so many changes of direction?

Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer arrives on board his election battle bus at a campaign event in Halesowen after unveiling Labour’s manifesto in Manchester for the forthcoming General Election on July 4. Picture date: Thursday June 13, 2024. PA Photo. See PA story POLITICS Election Labour. Photo credit should read: Stefan Rousseau/PA Wire (Image: Stefan Rousseau)

For Mr Starmer the seeds of his downfall were sown in that landslide: he received just 33.7 per cent of the popular vote, the lowest winning share ever. There was no love for him or his party – but there was hatred for the clowning Tories.

Mr Starmer appears to have decided that the change the country really needed was a change in competence: he would govern in a sensible lawyerly fashion without the silly psychodramas of Johnson and Truss.

MANCHESTER, ENGLAND – JUNE 13: Labour Party leader Sir Keir Starmer speaks during the launch of Labour’s general election manifesto on June 13, 2024 in Manchester, United Kingdom. Labour is consistently leading the polls by over 20 points, according to the latest YouGov data. (Photo by Anthony Devlin/Getty Images) (Image: Anthony Devlin)

There was no soaring vision about making Britain great again, just drab stuff about the mess the country was in and how there was a £22bn black hole so things could only get worse. Then pensioners became the first to bear the brunt when their winter fuel allowance was painfully withdrawn – an unpopular announcement Mr Starmer expected all Labour MPs to publicly support until he U-turned on it 11 months later.

And so the die was cast for a premiership of U-turns in search of popularity instead of policy announcements based on the certainties of principle. The most damaging was the backtracking on much needed welfare reforms; one of the most peculiar was the big idea about digital ID cards, without which you would not be able to get a job in the UK, which seems just to have disappeared like a puff of smoke.

This was enough to make Mr Starmer unpopular, but it cannot explain the visceral hatred that some people have for him. History will look back and wonder why such brutal vitriol has rained down on him when among his achievements are falling NHS waiting lists, raising 450,000 children out of poverty, reducing net migration by two-thirds, and keeping Britain out of Donald Trump’s spectacularly ill-advised war.

Not even his appointment of a paedophile’s friend, Peter Mandelson, can explain it, although sending Mr Mandelson to Washington as Britain’s ambassador was an error from which Mr Starmer has never recovered.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his wife Lady Victoria Starmer on the steps of 10 Downing Street, London, after his speech where he said he will resign as leader of the Labour Party and he has informed the King of his decision. Picture date: Monday June 22, 2026. PA Photo. Photo credit should read: Andrew Matthews/PA Wire (Image: Andrew Matthews)

It must go back to the thinness of that landslide victory in which nearly 70 per cent of voters didn’t buy into Mr Starmer and he did not have the strength of personality, the charisma, to convince them to give him the benefit of the doubt, to connect with them so they felt he was on their side.

In fact, his response has at times been cloth-eared: as people turned to Brexit-backing Reform, he said Britain should move closer to Europe; as voters cried out for new ideas, he brought back Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman from the 1990s.

He wasn’t able to lead the country and he hasn’t been able to lead his party. For some loyalist local MPs, who owed their seats to his landslide, his failings over defence spending were the last straw.

But at least in making the change, Labour isn’t going to fall into the Tories’ trap of 2024 and have two contenders spending the summer touring the country and trashing each other.

Yet are they falling into their own trap of 2007 when Gordon Brown was crowned as prime minister without ever revealing how he would do things differently to his predecessor Tony Blair or what he was grand vision was for the country. And he lost the next election.

Andy Burnham’s first picture in The Northern Echo archives from 2008 when he was Culture Secretary Andy Burnham and visited a Grade II listed pigeon cree built in 1955 by Maurice Surtees (right) on allotments at Ryhope in Sunderland (Image: Owen Humphreys/PA)

And what change is Mr Burnham going to represent? In 2015, I chaired the Labour regional leadership hustings in Newcastle when Mr Burnham stood with Jeremy Corbyn, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall. From my seat on the stage, I could feel Mr Burnham, once regarded as a Blairite, was being sucked leftwards as Mr Corbyn was winning over the crowd.

A Labour insider recently told me that in debates, Andy always tries to go last so he can hoover up all the best applause lines.

Health Secretary Andy Burnham enjoys a lemon top on Redcar sea front while campaigning in 2010. (Image: stuart boulton)

So which policies is Mr Burnham going to champion? How is he going to be different to Mr Starmer when his only democratic mandate is the 2024 manifesto with “change” on the front cover.

Andy Burnham (centre top) arrives at London Euston train station as he travels to Westminster to take up his seat in the House of Commons after winning the Makerfield by-election. Picture date: Monday June 22, 2026. PA Photo. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has resigned as PM and leader of the Labour Party less than two years after coming to power. Sir Keir’s decision to stand down means Labour will now hold a contest to choose his successor, with Andy Burnham seen as the frontrunner. Photo credit should read: Jeff Moore/PA Wire (Image: Jeff Moore)

Are his chumminess, his matchday polo shirts and his lavish eyelashes just going to replace Mr Starmer’s stiffness in a suit, Brylcreemed fringe and nasal awkwardness? Is this just a change of personalities and not policies.

Because for all this talk of change, whoever is the next leader will face the same problems as Mr Starmer: high energy bills, high taxes, high defence spending, high NHS waiting lists, no plans for social care, war in Europe and two more years of Donald Trump. The more things change in No 10, the more they stay the same for the country.

“The irony is that a Prime Minister more sympathetic to Northern Ireland’s funding arguments could ultimately prove more demanding of its politicians.”

Andy Burnham has not yet walked through the door of Downing Street, but Northern Ireland’s political parties are already facing questions they have spent years avoiding.

This morning’s resignation of Keir Starmer potentially signals the arrival of a very different understanding of how the United Kingdom should be governed.

Starmer’s approach to devolution was largely cautious. Whatever frustrations existed between Belfast and London, the broad framework remained familiar as the Treasury demanded financial discipline and Stormont demanded additional funding as the arguments repeated themselves with remarkable consistency.

Burnham appears to view the relationship differently. Throughout his political career, he has argued that the UK’s problems stem from an overly centralised state that systematically favours London and the South East of England. He has frequently drawn comparisons between the economic challenges facing Northern Ireland and those facing the North of England. In his view, both are symptoms of a system that concentrates power and investment in one part of the country while expecting the rest of the country to manage the consequences.

That analysis will be welcomed by many at Stormont. For years, ministers from every major party have argued that Northern Ireland is being asked to deliver public services with insufficient resources. The Executive continues to insist there is a structural gap between what it receives and what it needs to spend, and a Prime Minister who is instinctively sympathetic to those arguments would represent a significant shift.

Yet there is a danger in assuming Burnham would simply be a more generous version of Starmer. His criticism of Westminster has never been based on the belief that local government should be free from responsibility. Quite the opposite. Burnham’s political philosophy is built around devolving both power and accountability.

In that regard, it is worth noting that Stormont’s current disputes revolve around the second of those principles rather than the first.

The Executive has spent years arguing against measures such as water charges while simultaneously arguing that public services are underfunded. Ministers have insisted that Northern Ireland deserves greater flexibility while often showing little appetite for using the powers they already possess. The result has been a political culture in which difficult decisions are routinely deferred while responsibility is directed elsewhere, and a Burnham government may have little patience for that model.

The irony is that a Prime Minister more sympathetic to Northern Ireland’s funding arguments could ultimately prove more demanding of its politicians. Additional investment may come with a greater expectation that Stormont demonstrates a willingness to reform itself.

One of the striking developments of recent months has been the growing willingness among parties outside unionism to revisit elements of the Good Friday Agreement’s operating arrangements. Sinn Féin, Alliance, and the SDLP have all argued, in different ways, that the current structures leave the institutions vulnerable to paralysis. Those arguments have generally been treated with caution in London.

Andy Burnham may view the question differently. His political language is filled with references to collaboration, problem-solving and reducing institutional blockages. If Stormont continues to drift from crisis to crisis, he may be considerably more open than his predecessors to proposals that reduce the ability of individual parties to bring the institutions to a halt, which will concern many unionists, not because constitutional change is imminent, but because it would represent a subtle shift in how Westminster understands Northern Ireland.

For much of the post-Agreement era, preserving the existing balance has been viewed as an objective in itself. Burnham may be more inclined to ask whether the structures are actually delivering effective government.

Perhaps the most intriguing question concerns electoral politics. For decades, Labour’s refusal to stand candidates in Northern Ireland has left a significant section of voters without a direct route to support the party that governs the United Kingdom, and Andy Burnham has long appeared uncomfortable with that arrangement.

If he were to move towards allowing Labour candidates to stand here, the consequences could be profound. The immediate focus would naturally fall on the SDLP, which would face direct competition for centre-left voters. But the longer-term significance may lie elsewhere.

We have spent years discussing the growth of the “other” designation in Northern Ireland and demographic change has attracted enormous attention. Political change perhaps deserves just as much.

A Labour Party operating on traditional economic and social issues would offer something that has largely been absent from local politics, with a major electoral force capable of competing without placing the constitutional question at the centre of every contest.

Whether such a project would succeed is another matter entirely. Northern Ireland has a long history of confounding predictions imported from elsewhere. But that uncertainty points towards the larger significance of a Burnham premiership.

It is worth noting that former SDLP leader Colum Eastwood’s partner, Louise Haigh, is likely to take a prominent position in a Burnham government, and may hold sway over Burnham’s decision to stand candidates in Northern Ireland.

Perhaps the biggest impact for Northern Ireland may be the challenge Andy Burnham’s politics presents to assumptions that have become deeply embedded within Northern Ireland’s political culture. For years, Stormont’s arguments with Westminster have largely been conducted with calls for more money, more powers and more flexibility. Burnham’s arrival could alter the conversation.

If this plays out, it will be worth watching to see what Stormont is prepared to do with greater autonomy if it receives it.

For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.

Lady Eleanor Donaldson will not receive a criminal conviction or face a prison sentence.

Former DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has been found guilty of 18 historical sexual offences, while his wife, Lady Eleanor Donaldson, was found to have committed acts which amounted to aiding and abetting some of those offences.

The offences relate to two women who were children at the time they were carried out.

However, despite the court’s findings, Lady Eleanor Donaldson will not receive a criminal conviction or face a prison sentence.

What happened in court?

Sir Jeffrey Donaldson was convicted of 18 historical sexual offences following a criminal trial.

Lady Eleanor Donaldson faced charges of aiding and abetting some of those offences. However, her case was dealt with through a legal process known as a “trial of the facts” rather than a conventional criminal trial.

The jury found that she had committed the acts alleged by the prosecution, but, because of her legal status in the proceedings, she cannot be convicted of a criminal offence.

What is a trial of the facts?

A trial of the facts is a special court procedure used when a defendant has been found unfit to stand trial.

In a normal criminal trial, a jury decides whether a defendant is guilty or not guilty of an offence.

In a trial of the facts, the jury is asked whether the defendant committed the act or acts alleged by the prosecution.

The jury is not asked to decide whether the person was guilty of a crime because the defendant has been deemed incapable of participating fully in a criminal trial.

Why was Lady Eleanor Donaldson not put on trial in the normal way?

Before the case reached a jury, Lady Eleanor Donaldson was found unfit to stand trial due to her mental health.

A defendant may be found unfit to plead if a court concludes they are unable to properly understand the proceedings, instruct lawyers, challenge evidence or otherwise participate effectively in their own defence.

Once someone is found unfit to stand trial, the criminal trial cannot proceed in the usual manner. Instead, the court holds a trial of the facts.

Does the finding mean she is guilty?

No. This is one of the most important distinctions in the case. A finding in a trial of the facts is not the same as a criminal conviction.

The jury determines only whether the defendant committed the physical acts alleged. It does not decide criminal guilt.

As a result, the court records a finding that the defendant “did the act” rather than a verdict of guilty.

Why won’t she go to prison?

A trial of the facts cannot result in a criminal conviction. Without a conviction, the court cannot impose a prison sentence in the same way it would following a guilty verdict.

Instead, judges have a limited range of disposals available to them.

These can include a supervision order, a hospital order where appropriate, or in some cases an absolute discharge.

The purpose of these measures is not punishment but the management of any risks arising from the conduct that has been proved.

What happens next?

The court will now consider what, if any, order should be made in relation to Lady Eleanor Donaldson following the findings against her.

For Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the case will return to court for sentencing on 25th September when the judge will determine the appropriate punishment for the offences of which he has been convicted.

The sentencing process takes into account a range of factors, including the nature and seriousness of the offences, any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and sentencing guidelines.

For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.