Michael Mann's latest crime opus has already hit theaters, and like most of his devoted fans, I was there opening day. Granted, my desire to be first in line for Public Enemies mainly had to do with my preoccupation with pretty boys in nice suits, but trust me, there were some loftier ideals at work. One of the reasons I love Mann's films is that he finds new ways to tell relatively traditional stories...which brings me to Miami Vice. Vice definitely wasn't one of Mann's most popular films, but I always defend this flick, and here's why: growing up, I watched Miami Vice, and I might have loved it, but even at the tender age of 10 I knew it was kind of silly. I had always wondered what the series would have looked like if the show had a little less cheap humor about Crockett and his alligator and a little more 'dignity' -- fast forward to 2006, and that's exactly what Mann did.

Gone were the over the top white suits and wise cracks (I mean, thank god I didn't have to watch Colin Farrell yucking it up with 'Elvis'), and instead, Mann replaced them with a darker, meaner, and (dare I say it?) more realistic Miami Vice. But just because Mann brought Vice into the present, didn't mean that those traditional touches were gone, and the teaser was proof. That first trailer had it all -- the music perfectly timed with every shotgun pump, speedboats, helicopters, guns and hot girls...and you can't get more Miami Vice than that.

After the jump; the teaser and a reminder of Vice on the small screen..

Indie Roundup reviews the past week of news from the independent film community and provides a peek at what's coming soon.

Opening. Two films opened yesterday which couldn't have less in common: Agnès Varda's essay film The Beaches of Agnès and Nia Vardalos' I Hate Valentine's Day. Tomorrow comes Anne Fontaine's comedy The Girl From Monaco.

Deals. Xavier Dolan's family drama I Killed My Mother, Kenneth Branagh's The Magic Flute, and Asghar Farhadi's drama About Elly have all been acquired by Here Films, the company formerly known as Regent Releasing. All three are headed for theaters next year. [indieWIRE]

Online Viewing. The 4th of July weekend inevitably brings thoughts of America as a land of immigrants, and that's the topic of Home, which debuts on Amazon VOD this week, featuring interviews with Mike Myers, Alfred Molina, and Liam Neeson. Also somewhat topical: if Michael Jackson had an impact on race in pop music, what about African-American musicians playing rock 'n' roll exclusively? Raymond Gayle's Electric Purgatory examines the issue (at iTunes). If you're looking for love, you have something in common with two women in the comedy/drama Arranged (also at iTunes.)

Box Office. Kathryn Bigelow's lacerating bomb squad thriller The Hurt Locker earned a per-screen average ($36,338) that bested even the giant robots, albeit on only four screens. Woody Allen's Whatever Works expanded to 35 screens and grossed $10,280 per outing. The combination of star Michelle Pfeiffer and director Stephen Frears could stir up only a tepid $5,338 per-screen at 76 locations for Cheri, which is less than the average for Duncan Jones' Moon in its third week on 21 screens. [Box Office Mojo.]

After the jump: David Hudson's The Daily takes a permanent (?) vacation, portending the end of the world as we know it.

It looks like things are getting more interesting each day when it comes to the music biopic The Runaways -- and I'm not talking about Joan Jett making Kristen Stewart cry. No, instead, there is news that Alia Shawkat (who will forever be known as Maeby Fünke) is joining the cast as famed bassist and 'Bangle' Micki Steele ... or at the very least an approximation of Steele. Latino Review is reporting that Shawkat has joined the cast as an 18-year-old bass player named Robin (aka Steele), and judging by the photo above, you have to admit that Shawkat would be a great choice to play the sexy bassist. I mean, just look at those lips.

Rather than get into a long and convoluted explanation about the awesomeness that is Steele, here is a little primer: Steele was one of the first members of The Runaways when they were touring the club circuit in L.A. and was considered the 'feminine' one in a group of bad girls. By 1976 she had left the band after the addition of Lita Ford (played in the film by Scout Taylor-Compton) and Cherie Currie (played by Dakota Fanning). Steele would go on to join another famous girl band, The Bangles, and create music history by teaching the world about 'Manic Mondays'.

There has been no word on why Steele isn't going to be named in the film; possibly because the film makers didn't secure the rights to use her image, or maybe her split from The Runaways wasn't an amicable one. My guess is that the character of Robin will be based on Steele, but also be an amalgam of some of the other band members that won't be featured prominently in the film.

The Runaways is still filming on location in L.A., but will arrive in theaters in 2010.

The way casting announcements and pics of a pudgier Matt Damon had come down the pike, one had every reason to think that Steven Soderbergh's The Informant! (now with exclamation point) was going to skew more serious than its newly debuted trailer sells.

It's not that there's anything wrong with telling the real-life story of a bi-polar whistle-blower (Damon) with a more decidedly comedic bent, but 'thriller', this does not scream. Then again, maybe Soderbergh just wanted to lighten things up after the epic Che and the austere The Girlfriend Experience, and if that's indeed the case, things do seem to be heading more towards the Ocean's Whatever lark end of his spectrum.

Although most sites seem to have The Informant! with an October 9th release date, the trailer and the page around it (you know, with the 40-Year-Old Virgin-like possible poster art) both state September (in line with a 9/18 date we've seen floating around elsewhere). Either way, I suspect that an appearance at one of this fall's high-profile festivals will help assure us that the film does indeed merit its especially enthused punctuation and that the Damon does indeed merit his schlub-tastic appearance.

Essentially there are two kinds of gangster movies: those made during the time when men wore hats in real life and those made during the time when men wore hats that came from wardrobe. The first type are usually in black-and-white, punchy, nervy and full of wisecracks. The second type are usually longer and more violent, but slower-paced and nobler of purpose, as if the hats suddenly carried an extra weight, an extra sadness. What Michael Mann has achieved with the new Public Enemies is an often fascinating, striking combination of the two.

I walked into the new film, convinced that it could never top lean, mean B-movie classics like Max Nosseck's Dillinger (1945) or Don Siegel's Baby Face Nelson (1957) in which these gangsters were initially immortalized. But it equals them, capturing some of their raw energy and allure and clocking in as a longer, but equally fast-moving and adrenaline-pumping example. Somehow Mann only manages to use the extra time for flash and spectacle, and hardly any for depth or detail, but that only helps to speed things along. Happily, he also avoids the typical origin story, and plunges right in.

Are you psyched to see Captain Jack Sparrow as a real-life gangster? Johnny Depp plays an infamous criminal in Michael Mann's Public Enemies, which opens tomorrow. But in a world where giant robots draw huge crowds, "do audiences want to see Depp as a fairly realistic, non-fantasy version of Depression-era bank robber John Dillinger?"

That's the question asked by Anne Thompson, a veteran industry analyst. She describes the movie as only "fitfully engaging ... often flat as a pancake." She says that Michael Mann's "biggest misstep here is the same as the Wachowskis with Speed Racer. His pursuit of what interests him formally may leave audiences behind." Like David Fincher's Zodiac and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Mann's own Collateral and Miami Vice, Public Enemies was shot on high-definition video. Thompson claims: "When moviegoers watch a period film, no matter how authentically recreated, they aren't expecting it to look like this. There's something jarring about the way Public Enemies shoves us into the past."

I don't know about you, but I could use a good shove now and again. I've enjoyed Mann's last two films, and the trailers for Public Enemies have done a good job of whetting my appetite. The cast, including Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard, and Billy Crudup, looks solid. I don't have any preconception about how period films should look -- I want a good, well-told story with interesting characters. How about you? Do you have certain expectations about how films set in the past should look? Do you want to see Johnny Depp as a "fairly-realistic, non-fantasy" bank robber?

How faithful should film adaptations be? The issue arises both with novels and with films that are remade: fans of the original are none-too-pleased to see the personality of beloved characters changed, settings or time periods moved, or -- horror of horrors! -- the ending changed. Watchmen ignited a mini-firestorm with the decision to alter the ending of the original graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons. On a somewhat smaller scale, faithful readers of Jodi Picoult's novel My Sister's Keeper are upset that the ending was changed for Nick Cassavetes' just-released movie version.

Author Picoult disclaims responsibility while trying to be diplomatic. "Yes, I know the ending is different," she writes on her official site. "Yes, I know some of you are very upset. I didn't change it. The author has no control over the movie, and it was hard for me to accept too. However, there's a great deal in the movie that I think is great, and I enjoyed watching it - and I hope you did too." She suggests that her fans let Warner Brothers know how they feel. As a point of interest, four out of five comments on my review for Cinematical have complained about the ending.

It seems foolish to try and establish a hard-and-fast rule that original endings should never be changed -- filmmakers should have the artistic right to exercise dramatic license when adapting a work to a different medium. Yet how often have film versions actually improved endings that they've changed?

A new adaptation (I refuse to use the word remake here) of Fahrenheit 451 has been in the works for ten years now. I was very excited by the news that Mel Gibson was planning it as a Braveheart follow-up, as it seemed like that would mark a new and serious phase of his directing career. I wish that was something I could have been right about.

Frank Darabont was the next one to take it on, and he's been attached to it since 2001, rewriting Terry Hayes' script and being delayed by everything from Indiana Jones IV, Mission Impossible III, The Mist, and Law Abiding Citizen. SciFi Wire caught up with Darabont at the Saturn Awards, and the director / writer declared that it was really time to get on with it already ... and that it might actually get underway this time, depending on whether or not the Big Name Actor he wants signs on.

"Fahrenheit is the thing I'm trying to get up next, which is casting-dependent, so it's one of those. I'm out to somebody at the moment, fingers crossed, because, boy, do I want to make that movie. I'm not giving up. I'll die in the traces before I don't make that movie ... It's not one of those movies that are vastly expensive by any contemporary standard, but money is still money, and it's of a price that requires somebody that will justify that investment. This is definitely going to be more than The Mist, so those other considerations do come into play."

You can go crazy wondering just who that Big Actor who can pull in the money and box office might be. Could it be someone that rumors have long attached, like Tom Hanks (Darabont's pick for years), Brad Pitt, or Tom Cruise? Or could we be looking at someone newly bankable, like Johnny Depp?

It's not all sh*ts and giggles. After tackling some heavy cancer treatment on Grey's Anatomy, Katharine Heigl has grabbed herself a big-screen drama. The Hollywood Reporter posts that Heigl will star and executive produce an upcoming film called Life As We Know It, which Greg Berlanti (Everwood) is directing.

Written by Ian Deitchman and Kristin Rusk Robinson, and in turnaround since 2001, the film will focus on two singles "who suddenly become caregivers to an orphaned girl after the parents, their mutual best friends, are killed in an accident." What? No romance and laughs in sight? Can it be?

Not so fast. It looks like this script has gotten one hell of a face lift, because when Fox 2000 originally bought it, the basic plot of the project was the same, but it was described as a romantic comedy. I guess someone along the line figured that sad, orphaned children don't make for happy stories ... unless Peter Pan is involved. The film will retain, however, the lingering scent of romance. Although THR says nothing of it, the Variety piece calls it a romantic drama.

Whatever the case, no starting date has been set, but the project is expected to be fast-tracked. Are you ready for Heigl to jump out of the ugliness of The Ugly Truth and into something meatier?