I think you'll find that the creators of that movie were forced to include things like that for the benefit of the American audience. The writers nailed the character in other ways.
Yes that's the thing about the 96 movie. All of the crap they included like Doctor snogging, the half human bit etc, was put in at the studio's behest to appeal to American audiences.
They had no choice, but even with those horrible constraints they did a not bad job with the Doctor and the Masters characters.
The Doctors costume and look is brilliant, he's for the most part an aristocratic, eccentric gentlemanly hero, he isn't the ONCOMING STORM, and Paul McGann though not a favourite of mine was a good enough choice and fitted in well with his predecessors.
Roberts Master meanwhile I don't get the hate for? Yes he is a bit hammy, but so what, so was Ainley.
He follows the Masters template perfectly. He hates the Doctor, he has no regenerations left (really glad they continued that story arc from Classic Who. IMO that made the Master far more interesting and scary.) He is a pitiful coward, he is hypnotic, and we see how manipulative is the way he tricks Chang and then disposes of him. Reminded me of Kassia, Trenchard, Goth etc in that respect.
Anybody who says Roberts is the worst and then PRAISES Missy as being like Delgado is more full of shit than a constipated blue whale.
The only major flaw aside from the half human bit you could level at the movie was that it didn't do anything new.
Its plot is pretty much a remake of The Deadly Assassin but with the action moved to earth.
Lets see. The Master is on his last life, and his body is literally rotting away to nothing. He wants to open the eye of harmony which will give him more lives, but exterminate a whole planet, and he doesn't care.
Its just kind of an inferior Deadly Assassin. Still I'd take an inferior retread of what came before than something like Death in Heaven which smashes everything to bits.