I was a big fan of the Road Runner vs Wile E. Coyote cartoons growing up. I would have loved a Road Runner plushie but it wasn’t a popular enough character to warrant one – so I got a t-shirt instead, which I wore to death.
So I was already hooked when I heard about COYOTE VS ACME.
But what really intrigued me, and what will no doubt compel the general population, is the colourful history behind this movie’s culmination.
COYOTE VS ACME was spun from a satirical 1990 New Yorker article of the same name by Ian Frazier. Written in heavy legalese that requires copious amounts of caffeine for mere folks to plough through, it presents the opening statement by Coyote’s attorney. It lists the plaintiff’s grievances, pinning his failure to capture the Road Runner on the consistently malfunctioning ACME products. In closing, the attorney seeks damages of over thirty-eight million dollars, including punitive damages in order to censure the Defendant.
This witty reframe of the Coyote vs Road Runner saga caught the attention of James Gunn. He developed the story with Samy Burch and Jeremy Slater, before enlisting producer Christopher DeFaria and director Dave Green to bring the story to life. Fast forward to 2023 – despite positive reactions from test audiences, Warner Bros shelved the movie in order to claim a tax write-off. The public backlash resulted in Warner Bros reversing its decision and allowing the film makers to sell the rights to other distributors.
Finally, this long-awaited movie is opening on 17th September in Australia.
So you can understand why I was excited to watch COYOTE VS ACME.
Additionally, as someone who loves a good pop culture reference, my enthusiasm was buoyed by how self-referential this movie is: Coyote is a renowned underdog, always trying yet failing to catch the blasted Road Runner. When he decides to take on the Goliath that is ACME, Coyote is forced to keep picking himself up after every obstacle explodes in his path. This uphill battle is mirrored in real life by the film’s arduous road to the screen. The PR copy can’t write itself any better – it is an underdog in every way, shape and form.
So, does the film live up to the hype?
It depends on who you’re asking.
The biggest selling point of this movie is how heavily it leans into the nostalgia of Looney Tunes. Fans will love the many Easter eggs throughout this film – including a lovely nod to the OG titans of the animation world, Tex Avery, Chuck Jones and Michael Maltese. Aside from the references within the movie, there are also intercuts of the classic Road Runner vs Coyote shorts. These are beautifully touched up – just enough to appease the desire for crisp images while still maintaining the feel of the original.
Fans will also love that despite being the plaintiff in a court case, the movie is faithful to the classic Coyote character who doesn’t speak but relies on signs to communicate. The film does take a few liberties with characters by expanding their roles and tweaking their canons. Thankfully, these changes are only minute and are done to facilitate the storyline – for example, Foghorn Leghorn is no longer just a condescending, blustering blowhard: he is the villainous CEO of ACME. Foghorn Leghorn is canonically a paternalistic, self-styled mentor. As a CEO determined to squash his opponent, hearing him say “Take a seat, son” delivers a malevolence that sent shivers down my spine.
I am clearly in camp Looney Tunes. However, I have to take off my rose-tinted glasses for a second and put on my reviewer’s lens.
We have established that COYOTE VS ACME is an underdog movie, through and through. In fact, the plot works hard to establish this underdog vs corporate giant narrative. The movie even introduces a wider conspiracy in the form of Project Sisyphus – as in the Sisyphus from Greek mythology who was condemned to an eternity of rolling a boulder uphill, only for it to roll back to the bottom once it’s near the top. And that’s the perfect metaphor for the plot for this movie because it gets to the point that I question whether I am indeed Wile E. Coyote, having to see him go through the court process.
Normally, I would rejoice this as being perfect for the underdog premise that the movie is selling.
However, it’s hard to truly believe this when there are so many contradictions within the story. Coyote’s lawyer, Kevin Avery (played by Will Forte), is a “Cartoon Injury Lawyer” – he should have had this case in the bag. Several times throughout the film, it’s suggested there’s little evidence when his office holds a paper trail of previous ACME settlements. Even if non-disclosure agreements were taken into account, Avery literally suggests seeing Porky Pig again, after an on-screen mishap.
Similarly, just when ACME makes a significant misstep, this appears to be completely disregarded even though it absolutely bolsters the plaintiff’s case. Coyote and Avery are left at the bottom of the hill all over again.
It feels like the movie is trying to make a statement about corporate greed and evil – but it’s upended by plot details that just can’t be overlooked. Consequently, the unfair struggle of the everyday man against corporate might isn’t sufficiently portrayed.
Additionally, the sharp turn in the last five minutes of the film creates an abrupt ending that’s hard to truly enjoy. After nearly ninety minutes of being invested in Coyote’s trials, it feels like a hastily tied conclusion to appease fans.
So in short, if you love the ridiculously madcap style and slapstick humour of Looney Tunes, you will LOVE COYOTE VS ACME. However, try not to stray from the fantastical Looney Tunes galaxy and into the real world of tight, legally-sound narratives – that’s where this movie backfires like a pair of ACME rocket-powered skates.
COYOTE VS ACME opens in cinemas on 17th September