User Score
6.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 79 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 79
  2. Negative: 10 out of 79

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 24, 2011
    8
    Great film, Not because one area of the film is amazing but simply because the overall product is good. Solid acting by the cast, Great action, and its interesting.
  2. Feb 2, 2012
    6
    It wasnt that bad. The acting is solid through out and there is a ton of good action, Its suprisingly addictive to watch. I have seen it 3-4 times and I still enjoy it. The plot isnt all that good and rather generic overall, Some parts of the movie are just stupid and make you question why they were added in the first place. Yet still its an enjoyable action film worth the watch.
  3. Jan 21, 2012
    4
    Swat doesn't try to be anything more than a fast paced action film so I'm not going to treat it like high art but boy does it disappoint. It's not that it has bad actors. The leads (Colin Farrel and Samuel L Jackson) are good, the villain (Jeremy Renner) is menacing with decent time devoted to his back story and the supporting members of the team (Michelle Rodriguez and LL Cool J) areSwat doesn't try to be anything more than a fast paced action film so I'm not going to treat it like high art but boy does it disappoint. It's not that it has bad actors. The leads (Colin Farrel and Samuel L Jackson) are good, the villain (Jeremy Renner) is menacing with decent time devoted to his back story and the supporting members of the team (Michelle Rodriguez and LL Cool J) are decent too. It's not about the writing although it is a little hammy at times. It's just that Swat is half a movie.
    Swat would be a pretty good action film if it didn't take so long to get started. The main story doesn't emerge until an hour has passed with the first hour being slow, uninteresting and just plain aggravating. The forming and training of the team could have taken half the time and could have been much more interesting. The unessential addition of Farrel's characters unhappy girlfriend just delays further and infuriates. The last hour itself is pretty decent with some great action and a nice brisk pace. The night-time setting does lead to some lighting issues with the final fight being hard to follow but it still entertains which is more than I can say about the beginning which is just dire. Finally if you're going to have a menacing villain, actually make him menacing. Olivier Martinez's French villain isn't so much bad as he is laughable. Someone who should be fearsome and dark is pompous and annoying and acts like his mummy took his toys away for being bad. It's just plain funny.
    Expand
  4. Dec 21, 2012
    7
    S.W.A.T. is a good movie but the lack of character development for anyone other than the protagonist (and even this was minimal) made you not really care too much for the outcome. That wasn't the worst part of the film though. By far the worst part of this movie was the mediocre dialogue. It's almost like the writers decided to throw as many corny, cheese-ball quips as possible. Not onlyS.W.A.T. is a good movie but the lack of character development for anyone other than the protagonist (and even this was minimal) made you not really care too much for the outcome. That wasn't the worst part of the film though. By far the worst part of this movie was the mediocre dialogue. It's almost like the writers decided to throw as many corny, cheese-ball quips as possible. Not only was this annoying but it made the characters feel fake. It was still entertaining but it's not a great movie at all. Expand
  5. Mar 8, 2014
    5
    If you just wanna see stuff getting blown up and gunfire action, you've found a perfect movie. If you wanna see a movie with real character development combined with intense action, you might want to look somewhere else.
  6. Nov 12, 2012
    2
    S.W.A.T. is the worst Michael Bay film with which Michael Bay had absolutely nothing to do with.
  7. Nov 19, 2013
    7
    SWAT is extremely head bashing and loud, but good cop fun. The acting is good by Jackson and Ferrell. With a good setup and plan for the film, including the VFX. The guns are always being pulled on and the atmosphere is awesome. The story is great, about drugs and black money, which delivers great "buddy" fun. This is a film to buy and enjoy on a Sunday night or after a long day at work-SWAT is extremely head bashing and loud, but good cop fun. The acting is good by Jackson and Ferrell. With a good setup and plan for the film, including the VFX. The guns are always being pulled on and the atmosphere is awesome. The story is great, about drugs and black money, which delivers great "buddy" fun. This is a film to buy and enjoy on a Sunday night or after a long day at work- SWAT is a buddy cop film. And it's cheesy fun. Expand
  8. Nov 20, 2013
    4
    S.W.A.T slaps out.
    The movie is long, boring, and not very entertaining. With moments of excitement and decent characters it keeps the film from falling apart, but S.W.A.T still falls flat.
  9. Dec 29, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Odd that people would critique this movie with complaints about no character development, no effective storyline, etc. Whenever you have a dynamic ensemble cast, you must balance the story between character development and the story arc--I.e., action. It's easy to criticize from an armchair, but trust me, actually doing it is difficult and nerve wracking...not to mention, budget eating and time snarfing. And when you have a movie such as S.W.A.T., on top of it all, people pay for the action. I am sure that miles of film are littering the editing room floor that would have fluffed up each character into a movie of their own. However, the sacrifices to the God of action at the expense of the God of brevity weren't without their necessity. I like action. Were there parts that were slow and maybe unnecessary? Of course. But every storyteller, in every medium, wants the target audience to know SOMETHING about the main characters, even if some of the chosen scenes seemed poorly thought out, or in some cases, pure filling...without the satisfying fullness that comes with a good story 'meal.' The action, while a bit murky in a few places, was mostly satisfying. The story, while a bit weak, followed the narrative arc that I would expect, fairly straightforwardly from beginning to end, with only a couple of false steps when it came to individual character story lines. And, of course, as in most good cop, bad cop movies, the filmmaker tried to blur the line between good and evil, with 'good guys' doing the 'wrong' thing, and at least one of the bad guys trying to do the 'right' thing. Ah, Hollywood. One day they may get it right. But for now, real life has more twists and turns than even S.W.A.T. could ever have seen coming, even with their high-powered sniper scopes at the ready. Expand
  10. Aug 4, 2014
    4
    Before I make up my own review of the other cop film starring Samuel L. Jackson (yeah the terrible one), I'll give my thoughts on this police thriller. Unfortunately, this is a bland, forgettable and inane movie that must be seriously thought before watching it.

    The story should captivate more. Jim Street and his fellows mates are sent to stop a gang of robbers who have taken over a
    Before I make up my own review of the other cop film starring Samuel L. Jackson (yeah the terrible one), I'll give my thoughts on this police thriller. Unfortunately, this is a bland, forgettable and inane movie that must be seriously thought before watching it.

    The story should captivate more. Jim Street and his fellows mates are sent to stop a gang of robbers who have taken over a bank. His hot-tempered friend Gamble disobeys an order to not shoot in the bank robbers and accidentally wounds a hostage, causing him an expulsion on S.W.A.T team. While Jim decides to stay in order to work in the "gun cage", Gamble turns against his once close friend and all of sudden, becomes the antagonist of the film. However, his screen time is not that much and his motivations are poorly executed. Clearly, the character development is not the strong point of this movie.

    However, the cast and acting are surprisingly good. Jackson and Ferrell give magnificent performances and believable dialogue. But the rest of the film is just a colossal bore until the final act which is provided by the return of the friend Gamble. His bloated screen time and uninteresting story prevents him from being a remarkable opponent for Jim, such a shame. He's more annoying than amusing but I guess that's part of the movie's charm. The director and his team could have put a lot of effort in the final battle but they decided instead using boring gunshots and underwhelming crashes, can't get what you always want right?

    In conclusion, this movie has no charisma or depth. It's a two hours long of poor character development, dull story and loud soundtrack. It's heavily bad even for today's standards.
    Expand
  11. Aug 18, 2014
    2
    "S.W.A.T." is one of those films you do not know why they were made, in the first place. A typical action film, with a bland story and shallow characters, that ends predictably as bad as it begins. The casting choices are good, but the whole thing is frustrating and forgettable. It won't disappoint action fans, though.
Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 35
  2. Negative: 9 out of 35
  1. While the movie is stupid, it is -- hooray, and let's put this in all the national ads! -- not appallingly stupid.
  2. A prototypical new-millennium summer movie, S.W.A.T. is no more than an extended trailer for itself.
  3. Offers up the kind of pleasures that only a summer movie can...The cast is good-looking, the soundtrack is loud, the plot is stupid.