MovieChat Forums > Pride and Glory (2008) Discussion > Abby Tierney -- a complete waste of time...

Abby Tierney -- a complete waste of time?

posted 15 years ago by mobocracy
25 replies | jump to latest

I know her illness is supposed to "explain" her hubby's inability to command the precinct, but his command competence and ability are demonstrated so infrequently that her character just seems like a dramatic distraction, "ooo, the cancer-striken wife".

And what's with the buzz cut? When she first appeared on screen I thought it was some kind of post-coital moment with some super tough G.I. Jane type cop. Nobody I've ever known on chemo (mom, dad, coworker) has a Marine Corps recruit buzz, they have the wispy smoothness of an old man.

Just more of this movie's barely noticeable attempts at character development.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] amontana80-1 15 years ago

I agree with you, a real waste of time. Her scenes should have been cut.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Noir-82 15 years ago

I agree with all the above.

[–] keven_patten 15 years ago

She asked Francis to be a good man and someone she and her kids could be proud of. In a sense this was her dying request since the cancer was consuming her, and he honored her dying request by telling the truth and not covering it up. The wife was meant to represent Francis conscious so in a sense she was relevant to the movie.

[–] wulff76 15 years ago

I agree with you for sure.

But the way she said it irritated me. "I trust you with MY kids"

Was there an indication that he was the step-dad or something? I mean I thought they were his kids too.

If I want your OPINION - I'll give it to YA!! LOL

[–] EngAkWaSdKy 15 years ago

If she died before the start of the movie, Fran wouldn't have heard the voice of reason in her telling him to do the right thing. True, it still would've given him the excuse of being consumed with her death instead of being tentative to his job, but the ending would've been much different. He probably would've had an "I don't care", hopeless attitude and wouldn't have done the right thing.

So I think there absolutely was substance to her role in the movie.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] EngAkWaSdKy 15 years ago

Why? Because she had no hair?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rosie485 14 years ago

I thought so too, until I watched movie 5 more times, she is incredible. She's important, because it's Fran's wife, and the scene where she's trying to tell him she trusts his judgement to make things right.

NOT a waste of time.

[–] mdidesidero 13 years ago

To say she was irrelevant to the film just isn't true. As has been stated, she represented Frank Jr's conscience, and in the end was the one responsible for dragging him to the right side of the law, so yes, she was relevant.

[–] AntonioDaniels 14 years ago

Felt the same way. I personally would've given the movie a higher rating had his wife not had cancer. I really can't take it anymore. This idea that it's almost hip to have a character with cancer in TV / movies these days. It's depressing enough that you hear about it in the news every few days. It just feels forced most of the time, especially on TV. Producers basically think, "ok, this is a drama, right? well, we haven't dealt with cancer yet, so let's just give it to one of the main characters."

This movie simply did not need a character with cancer to get its point across. The fact that the 3 main characters were all linked through family was more than significant. I sincerely hope no one responds saying something along the lines of "If no one has cancer in movies or TV, people will forget it exists." It's simply overdone, that's all.

[–] ChefC 13 years ago

Cancer is on the increase, 1 in 3 people will be affected by it in one way or another during their life, if you are yet to have a loved one suffer from it, or have it yourself, then lucky you. I wouldn't say it is included in films and TV any more than it occurs in real life.

I think the reason it was included in this film wasn't just so they could cover all the 'drama' bases, but because it helped Fran put things in perspective.

----------
Who would have guessed it, we all have different opinions about subjective things!

[–] Xcalat3 14 years ago

I have to agree, her character is kind of pointless, seems like and attempt to over-dramatize the movie

When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

[–] StarrySkyWaltz 13 years ago

Yeah, I really disliked this part of the film. It seemed to be added more for gritty purposes than plot development.

[–] ChefC 13 years ago

I liked her character. She acted it perfectly and it gave you reason to believe Fran may have let things get on top of him work wise, while dealing with a wife who is ill. She also acted as his conscience and made him realise he had to do the right thing.

The scene where he told her he was scared and couldn't find a way out was one of the strongest in the whole film. He is there telling her he is scared because he may lose his job, and she is sitting there thinking about how she is going to die, I think it made him realise he had to man up and do the right thing.

As for the hair comment, having been on chemo a year or so ago, her hair was pretty standard with what you will see on a cancer ward. It all falls out when chemo starts but it can start coming back patchy like that, most patients (as did I) will completely shave their hair off until it starts to come back properly.

As realism goes I could see nothing wrong with the way they had her hair.

Just my 2 cents.

----------
Who would have guessed it, we all have different opinions about subjective things!

[–] chrisasiama 13 years ago

The scene where she tells him to be the good man she can trust to look after her kids is important. As others have said, that is when Fran decides to speak up and do the right thing. Her having cancer explains why he was so distracted at work and didn't take care of things.

[–] throcko1 13 years ago

Thanks--I was wondering about the realism of the hair. It definitely looked like it had been shaved rather than having fallen out, but your explanation makes sense.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]