The easy thing is that this is such a departure, this ‘chick flick’ or whatever. But, in fact, on a character level it’s in some ways not a departure for me at all. That’s what interests me in what I do, is finding characters that I relate to and that inhabit a world that interests me. And that world I like to be different from one picture to another because that, to me, is the exciting part of it.
I love the fact that these two sisters were, on the one hand, apparently very different - if you hung a label on them. But in fact were very much the same when you break them apart. Their issues of self-image and self-esteem and their desire to break free of the box that they’re each in, and in a sense get a second chance and become better versions of themselves. Those are all issues that I don’t think of as female issues, but I think of them as human issues. And in fact they’re the same issues as the cops in ‘LA Confidential’ or the guys on the street in ‘8 Mile.’ The yearning for family; the yearning for human connection. I relate to all of that so strongly.
Getting back to the Cameron aspect, superficially it’s kind of a no-brainer idea her being Maggie because Maggie is somebody who’s been allowed to cruise by on her good looks and the way that men react to her good looks, to her fluffy hair and other attributes. Who better than Cameron to play that? The big question in my mind was was she prepared to go the distance, to play the dark side of that. To play the fear and insecurity.
Again, back to the design of the script, what I loved is that that character behaves in a reprehensible way. It’s ugly. It’s hateful. She’s totally self-centered, irresponsible, manipulative, and a lot of performers don’t like to go there. And they like to wink at the audience if they do go there and say, ‘This isn’t really what I’m like. This is this character.’ But that never feels truthful.
The decision for me to make this movie was based on the script and the meeting I had with Cameron right after [reading the script] where I talked about this with her and she talked about it with me. The excitement that we shared, we had the same vision of this. So we partnered up – I mean that in the literal sense because Cameron cut her fee significantly to make this movie as I did, because it’s not the kind of movie that the studio particularly wants to pay Cameron Diaz to be in. You know, it’s not the movie you put her smiling face on and go, ‘This is a romantic comedy.’ That’s easy. This is harder.”
Curtis Hanson on the Pace of “In Her Shoes:” “I love the structure of this picture. The length I don’t think about, quite frankly. As I get into the editing process I go, ‘Let’s refine, let’s shape. Let’s make the movie better.’ Inevitably you start off with a certain length the first cut and it becomes shorter as you go along. I’m obligated to deliver a movie that’s under 2 ½ hours, let’s say. But from there it’s up to the length of the picture that works best.
I love the bifurcated structure of this movie, which does take a certain amount of time. I love the fact, again, that the specific world was not the same of as the world of ‘LA Confidential’ or Detroit or Pittsburgh in ‘Wonder Boys’ where that specific world was the appeal. But what’s equally appealing here was creating two worlds that, just like these two sisters, appear to be very different. Philadelphia and Florida – very different in their colors, very different in their climate. And yet the human concerns in both worlds are the same. I love that possibility in the script and tried to adhere to that as much as possible with the movie. Where once these two girls break apart, it’s very evenly divided between the two of them. It’s equally their story. And of course Ella, when she enters, it’s the three of them.”
Page 2 Director Curtis Hanson on Selling "In Her Shoes" to a Studio and the Status of "Lucky You"
