Why so much hype?

Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Okay, I think I summed up the movie relatively well in the title line. There were some good action scenes and for a B-list ensemble, the acting wasn't horrible. There was also an attempt to have the story drive the movie, rather than have it be a vehicle for off the wall, Michael Bay-esque explosions and groan inducing, Steven Seagal type fire and fistfights.Now the negative. Basically, this movie is another one of those "unconventional teacher takes a job at an inner city school and uses tough love and creative methods to teach all the rough, gangster wannabe kids that they DO have a future and can make something of themselves," type of movies...only it's with a SWAT Team.Okay, so not the worst story in the world. Overused, obviously, but not the worst. The things that got me were the unanswered questions and glaring factual errors. I've already added a few in the goofs section, but here are a bunch of things that made me not like the movie:-Detroit PD's SRT (not SWAT, as they are in the movie) is a VERY top notch unit, equal to LAPD SWAT in terms of quality officers, training, and equipment. That they needed to learn from the "more" elite LAPD unit is silly and a bit insulting. It also seems unlikely that Detroit wouldn't be on the FBI's short list for HRT certification alongside LA rather than after.-They really didn't seem to learn anything special in the training course that a CIVILIAN couldn't learn at a shooting class. (see: Frontsight, Gunsite, etc). FBI HRT is a top tier, counterterrorist unit that trains alongside Delta Force and DEVGRU (SEAL Team Six) for a LONG list of missions. That they shoot on the move rather than standing still is NOT what sets them apart from police SWAT teams.-The fact that they called it "Detroit SWAT" rather than "SRT" shows a lack of attention to detail, IMO. A little thing, but it annoyed me. "But not everyone knows what SRT is," yeah, they wear tactical armor and carry M4 rifles and take down hostage takers, we would have figured it out.-I didn't understand why they had an LAPD officer training DPD officers in supposed HRT tactics. If DPD's team wanted to be HRT certified, why didn't the FBI send HRT operators to certify them? -Why was Cutler armed with that stupid Bushmaster ACR the whole time? Yeah, it looks cool, but it's all bark and no bite. Obviously, they were trying to attract the Modern Warfare crowd with that.-Cutler picks an old army buddy to be his assistant, even though she (Cutler's friend) doesn't have any law enforcement experience. Being a SWAT officer is very different than being a solider. Sure, they have some of the same tactics in terms of shooting and room clearing, but there's also different rules of engagement, and SWAT officers are still police officers, not soldiers. Doesn't matter if you were a Navy SEAL or you worked at McDonald's before you became a cop, you still go through the same academy and you still work patrol for a few years before you can even apply to your department's tactical unit. That somebody, just because they were in the army, would immediately be assigned to a SWAT team without having even attended a police academy, is just stupid. I know it's a movie, but it's stupid. Cutler hand picks a buddy to help in the certification process and he doesn't even pick a fellow cop? C'mon man!-And of course, my favorite thing (and they do this even in the good cop movies) the fact that police officers gun down the bad guys, and that's that. Clean your gun, get some chow, and get ready for the next call out. No administrative leave, no mountain of OIS (officer involved shooting) paperwork, no media asking "why didn't they just shoot him in the leg? Did they say 'please' when they asked him to drop the gun?" I could go on for hours, but overall, the movie was dumb, and I'll leave it at that.

Although the original SWAT may have embellished the realms of reality a little, it was a movie I was still able to watch and enjoy to the most. This sequel however is really in the league of TV drama over any type of well researched and feasible movie plot execution. No doubt the money is there in the props and gear, but the execution is not beyond what I would expect to see on commercial TV in the middle of the day.I'm not adverse to stretching the realms of reality a bit, I enjoy the old Bond films as well as things like Die Hard 4, but the stretches of the reality in those films are within an expected context and add to the experience more in their own out there and comedic fashion. In this movie however everything is pitched as though it is supposed to be dead serious, so if you're a person who has even half a clue, or an ounce of respect for that matter, of what these guys do in real life, then this movie will most likely eat at you the entire way through. If it was made in the 80's, then maybe it would have been right at home.There was either little real world advice sought on the production of this, or it was totally ignored, since there is very little at all aside from the uniforms and the odd technical reference which made any correlation between them and their real world counterparts, especially so in their discipline and conduct. You could see this coming as soon as the opening credits rolled and we see a clip being filled with spent ammunition.So unfortunately I think we've just set the public impression and fear of what real SWAT teams are back about 20 years thanks to this movie, and I can now see a great many children being spanked and sent to their room for even suggesting any aspiration of being a SWAT officer when they grow up.Alas movies are not supposed to be documentaries. So the one main comparison for me that comes to mind between the quality of SWAT: Firefight vs the original SWAT movie is the difference between Behind Enemy Lines with Owen Wilson and Gene Hackman and the later WWE produced sequel Behind Enemy Lines: Columbia. If you're the type of person who enjoyed Behind Enemy Lines: Columbia without grinding your teeth the entire way, then SWAT: Firefight will probably ride well with you. Otherwise if you're the type of person who more enjoyed the first Behind Enemy Lines and enjoys a bit more believability in your story and some well researched details to what they are representing on screen, then this will probably just have you infuriating and wishing for that 90 minutes of your life back again.

The storyline contains a clear unfair background. Can the arrogance and pride win in the real life's frame? The quote that caught my attention in the movie: "She died for your sins, now you die for yours." So what?? Where is the concordance about it inside the storyline?? The action context, the weapons, the military tactics are fun but the plot of the movie screwed up and messed up the real essence. I think this kind of movie is for DVD rental market directed to people who just wanna watch action and just that, people who do not know watching to movies indeed. I personally do not recommended for people who are looking for a complete movie.

Don't know where jonmcann got his review from....but he was way off. Not the very best of movies...but it definitely was a watchable move and there was no suffering sitting thru it. The action was pretty much non-stop and the plot well put together. If the acting had been more up to par it would for sure get a much higher review.Well worth watching. I imagine that a few better actors would have made the movie better. And the role of Hatch could have been better laid out more clearly to the viewers. And also bringing in Lori to the squad was a bit curious, as it was sort of she was not previously in the movie anywhere else that I recall. All in all a decent movie....just that the acting could have been better.