Firearms expert Patrick McNamara has posited that Samuel L. Jackson's $207 million cop movie has so many blunders and errors that he gave it 1 star. Jackson's best movies include plenty of strong action sequences starring the actor, such as his gun-toting role as Jules Winnfield in Pulp Fiction. The actor has plenty of other high-octane films under his belt, too, such as The Hitman's Bodyguard, The Hateful Eight, and Kingsman: The Secret Service. While he doesn't always get the highest levels of action in all his movies, he's still been in plenty of thrilling films throughout his career.
However, while not everything he's known for is action, some of Jackson's long-running franchise movies fall under that category. This includes smaller series like the Shaft movies, to his blockbuster role as Nick Fury in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. His multifaceted work in the genre has shown him as everything from the starring hero, to a mentor with his own storyline going on. However, one movie from 2003 showed him in a thrilling leadership role, but one that wasn't fully accurate to the reality of its subject matter.
S.W.A.T. Gets 1 Star For Accuracy From Firearms Expert
The Movie's Training Sequence Isn't Very Realistic
According to McNamara, one of Jackson's least realistic action movies is S.W.A.T., a movie adaptation of the 1975 crime drama of the same name. The film sees the lead actor portray Sergeant Dan "Hondo" Harrelson, who leads his team in bringing drug kingpin Alex Montel (Olivier Martinez) to prison, all while criminals try breaking him out for a $100 million reward. While the film was a box office success, earning $207.7 million against a $70 million budget, it holds a 48% with critics on Rotten Tomatoes, indicating mixed reviews.
Now, speaking with Insider
One of the S.W.A.T. cops, during his movement from Point A to Point B, does a little roll. Nonsense. The objective when moving from one point to the other is to get there! It's hard to shoot a moving target, you have to eliminate predictability, and mobility equals survivability. Don't do a roll.
You can see that it's what's called a failure to eject. So the round extracts, the brass extracts, but it didn't eject. He keeps squeezing the trigger. Trained gun owners are not gonna do that. The sound and feel of that malfunction is very, very unique. So if you continue to try to fire a gun with a failure to eject, you're gonna squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, squeeze, forever. Nothing's gonna happen. Ever. It's not a catastrophic malfunction, but it's a very, very easy one to clear!
So there was another thing that really drove me crazy with the scene. First off, the bullet holes looked ridiculous, big rips in the paper and everything. They looked nothing like bullet holes in paper. And then you wouldn't have an R.O. [Ranger Officer] put his finger in the hole and announce, "This guy's the winner! This guy didn't meet up to the standard!" Whatever, like that. It's just very unrealistic. They would have been right there checking the targets themselves.
I would rate this clip a 1 [out of 10]. Action movies, you have to suspend reality. When an action movie is, let's say, highlighting police or military, I think you have to be more careful with realism. This one here was riddled with buffoonery.
What S.W.A.T.'s Lack Of Realism In Its Training Scene Says About The Movie
Its Unrealistic Nature Likely Extends To The Rest Of The Film
Although S.W.A.T. focuses on a real law enforcement group, McNamara's expert opinion about its training scene indicates that same lack of realism might extend to the entire movie. The film's mixed reviews from critics include some of them saying the action scenes were believable, but it seems some of the more important establishing sequences didn't pass the test. The movie still remains one of Jackson's less well-remembered roles regardless, given its lukewarm reception and status as a remake of a TV show.
Source: Insider/YouTube
