Hold on to your glo-suits, because Tron 2 has finally kicked into high gear. Just one month after Olivia Wilde signed on to star in the much anticipated sequel, The Hollywood Reporter has announced that Disney has chosen Eragorn's Garrett Hedlund for the lead in the sequel to the cult sci-fi flick. Plus, if you were like me and were less than thrilled with the working title TR2N, it looks like Disney has made it a lot easier on all of us and the film will now go by the much simpler title of Tron.

So while most details about the film have been kept under wraps, Sci Fi Wire recently got the chance to sit down with Wilde and she gave us a little tease of what we should expect from the sequel. Don't worry, the interview is spoiler free but Wilde was willing to share a few tidbits, including the return of Bruce Boxleitner, and that director Joseph Kosinski will not just be relying on green screen, and is actually building some honest to goodness sets for the film.

There had been a few hints that the film was going to act as a 'next chapter' in the story, but what we do know is that Hedlund plays a man who finds himself retracing the steps of a character from the original movie named Kevin Flynn. Flynn was originally played by Jeff Bridges (who will also be returning for the sequel), a computer programmer that ended up as the CEO of a software corporation.

Tron is expected to start production this spring, and should arrive in theaters in 2011. Sound off below, and tell us what you think about Disney's choice of leading man...

I think its time that John Waters gets a phone tree going, lassos in his worldwide band of freaks and friends, and introduce Adam Shankman to a different sort of life. He needs to get wild. Besides tackling Bye Bye Birdie, there's more Hairspray sequel news, courtesy of MTV, that has its quirky perks and boring pitfalls.

The sequel will be titled Hairspray 2: White Lipstick -- which just so happened to be Waters' original title for the 1988 film (without, of course, the "Hairspray 2" part). And it does have some Waters zaniness, according to Shankman: "[The treatment] is amazing, but it's crazy. There are things in there that I was like 'Can we do that?' It's real John Waters-y stuff, and it was more like a sequel to his movie than to our movie. Which I love, because then that becomes re-interpreted."

But don't expect too much quirk -- this is Shankman, so his crazy scale definitely isn't equivalent to your run of the mill Waters fan. Sadly, one of the things to go is Zac Efron taking acid and having "trippy conversations with acne on his forehead." (Wussy!) Things from the treatment he'll probably keep: Edna's addiction to diet pills, a new villain -- which means that Michelle Pfeiffer and Brittany Snow are most likely out, and lastly, someone (other than Link) will get drafted for Vietnam.

Any guesses? Any hopes for this White sequel?

No matter what I say, I think most of us out there are never going to believe that the follow-up to Neil Marshall's The Descent could ever live up to the original. But, these latest stills from the sequel certainly make me feel a little better about the whole idea -- well, that and the fact that Marshall acted as a 'hands-on' producer for the flick. Still photographer Ollie Upton recently released a whole whack of still photographs from the flick on his website (check them out below) and it looks like things certainly haven't gotten any better for our heroine since we last saw her.

James Watkins' (My Little Eye) script centers on Sarah Carter (Shauna Macdonald), who has emerged from the Appalachian cave covered in her friend's blood, and borderline catatonic. When she is forced to go back down in the caves to help locate her missing companions, she is haunted by visions of what had happened, and as the rescue party ventures further into the caves, Sarah starts to lose her grip on reality. Of course, you can count on the 'Crawlers' making another appearance, and from then on you know things are going to go bad ... very, very, bad.

The Descent: Part 2 will be released in the UK on May 15th, but so far there have been no dates announced for North America. Stay tuned to Cinematical for any updates on a US release, otherwise, those of us on this side of the pond might have to wait for the DVD.

If you were wondering which film would get remade next, or which musical, look no further! On the heels of Hairspray, and even Fame, The Hollywood Reporter posts that Adam Shankman is gearing up to remake Bye Bye Birdie for Columbia.

The company has been trying to get this remade for ages, under many guises. It was once going to be re-imagined into a hip-hop musical, and both John Chu and Tina Fey (that I'd want to see!) have circled the project. Right now, there's no word on who will be the new writer, nor an indication of how Shankman will handle the film. I would assume, however, that it won't get reimagined, but rather updated with sparkly face and new, sassy dance moves -- if Hairspray is any indication.

But who on earth could fill the shoes ones tapped away by the likes of Dick Van Dyke and Jason Alexander? I would be the opposite of surprised if Zac Efron got tapped for the lead, but it's time Mr. Shankman got a new lead. Any ideas?

So Erik-with-a-k covered the coming comedies of 2009, Scott was all over the horror picks (though his inclusion of Race to Witch Mountain still boggles my mind), Eric-with-a-c nabbed the family-friendly fare, and Elisabeth went over the geek fodder that awaits. But while I respect their calendar years and made-up math alike, I've opted to divide my list of 2009's action and adventure flicks into four categories: Action Flicks I Couldn't Care More About, Action Flicks I Couldn't Care Less About, Action Flicks That I Hope Surprise Me, and Those Which Fell In Between. Enjoy!

Action Flicks I Couldn't Care More About: First and foremost -- Watchmen (March 6th). It's one hell of a graphic novel and looks to be one hell of an adaptation (with or without the Giant Blank), and come Fox or high water, it'll see the light of day soon enough. Then there's Public Enemies (July 1st), which has me sold on not the subject matter, but sheer pedigree: Michael Mann directs Johnny Depp and Christian Bale as '30s gangsters. (It doesn't hurt that the earliest word ranges from damn good to great.) On the skimpier side, I can only hope that Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (July 17th) streamlines its source material as the previous one had, and I can only hope that Crank 2: High Voltage (April 17th) lives up/down to the depravity of its predecessor. There's one last action movie that I couldn't care more about because, well, I've already seen a version of it. The international cut of Taken (January 30th, though reportedly opening with some R-dodging trims) is about as brisk and butt-kicking as one might hope out of a man-on-a-mission kidnapping thriller, and if you disagree, I'll send Liam Neeson to change your mind.

2009 has begun on a rather tense note for geekdom as Watchmen became further embroiled in legal soup. As Fox pushes for a delay, we must contemplate a rather thin year of geeky offerings .... which just shows how spoiled we've become. Watchmen and Wolverine alone would have made our year before the wonder that was 2008, when we had Bruce Wayne, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and the Punisher. But hey, this is going to be the Year of Announcements -- we're going to find out who Captain America and Thor are, who or what Iron Man must face in his sequel, and hey, we might even find out whether Edward Norton will reprise his role as the Hulk. We're going to have fun, no matter what happens with Watchmen.

January
Nothing. Watch The Dark Knight ten more times, I guess (especially when it returns to conventional and IMAX theaters on January 23). Or read a graphic novel; you must have gotten some for Christmas? Anyway, take a breather. You're still recovering from 2008.

February
Neil Gaiman's Coraline, and a limited release of the long-delayed Fanboys both come out on February 6th. Gaiman for the win, no question.

March
Watchmen Watchmen Watchmen Watchmen Watchmen Watchmen Watchmen. It will come out on the 6th. It will. We must not doubt.

April
Dragonball Evolution hits theaters on the 8th. The excitement is palatable.

May
This is the month of geekdom, kicking off with the film my year centers around, X-Men Origins: Wolverine on May 1. If this isn't good, the Geek Beat will burn with the fury of a thousand suns the following Tuesday. May that be your warning, Fox.

A little independent film you might have heard of also comes out this month: Star Trek hits theaters on May 8th.

Of course, "family film" usually translates into "kiddie film," with the parents and older siblings left to grit their teeth and endure while the tykes laugh at the singing chipmunks. Rare is the film that is truly entertaining for the entire family -- which is why I'm always excited about a new Pixar project, since they're the only ones who pull it off regularly.

Pixar's Up (due May 29) is this year's entry, and there's no reason to suspect it will be any less admirable than the company's previous work. Coraline (Feb. 6), from the director of Nightmare Before Christmas, looks like it could be an imaginatively macabre treat for grown-ups and kids. There's also a Harry Potter movie due in July, though that series becomes darker and less kid-oriented as it progresses, so you might want to leave certain younger family members at home.

Here's as complete a list as I can muster for what family-oriented flicks are coming in 2009, including live-action, animation, and whatever the Jonas Brothers are.

January: Hotel for Dogs, Inkheart.
February: Coraline, Jonas Brothers: The 3D Concert Experience.
March: Race to Witch Mountain (Disney + The Rock = $$$), Monsters vs. Aliens.
April: Hannah Montana: The Movie.
May: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian, Up.
June: Imagine That (warning: contains Eddie Murphy).
July: Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (is this a prequel? How are the dinosaurs dawning after the mammals?), G-Force, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
August: None, unless you count G.I. Joe, which is based on a line of children's dolls.
September: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.
October: Toy Story (3D re-release), Where the Wild Things Are, Astro Boy.
November: A Christmas Carol (one of those crazy 3D motion-capture things, like Polar Express), The Fantastic Mr. Fox, Old Dogs (aka John Travolta and Robin Williams remake Daddy Day Care).
December: Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakuel (GET IT?!!!?!?!?), The Princess and the Frog.

It's been cooking for over a year, and while you might have wished for the project to slip into development hell and never escape, Scream 4 is still on the way. According to HorrorMovies.ca, a community member has shared the latest about the sequel, which is said to reboot the horror movie-loving franchise.

If the source is right, 4 will jump into production early this year, "re-starting" the franchise, but adding in some old characters. It seems that Jamie Kennedy told iFMagazine that he might reprise his role, and that "the rest of the cast would be a mixture of new characters with 'old faces that you wouldn't believe,' and that the film will only go ahead with the involvement of director Wes Craven." As of December 13, writer Michael T. Kennedy was still waiting to hear from the Weinsteins about whether his script was a Go.

I'm not quite sure how you reboot the franchise, include the original characters, yet focus on new ones. Was there another killer out there while Billy and Stu sliced and diced their friends? Is Sidney not the only girl in Woodsboro to attract vengeful murderers? What faces will return? I've always wished for a Scream franchise where Randy and Tatum were the ones who got to live, but I think that ship has sailed.

*Note: The attached photo is a fake.

If you thought the delayed release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was too much to bear, what about never ever getting to see how things wrap up on the big screen? In the wake of news that Disney had dumped Narnia, The Independent reports that Harry Potter could be next.

Now it's not a completely out of left-field thought created for the article. It seems that screenwriter Steve Kloves "said recently that Warner Bros was worried about the prospects for the last three films in the series, since JK Rowling is no longer driving anticipation for the titles by producing new books." I guess Warner Brothers didn't hear the world-wide sighs and cries of pain after delaying Half-Blood.

While it's natural for a studio to entertain movie-cutting ideas when money is tight, it would be utterly ridiculous to end the Potter franchise with one left to go. Yes, The Subtle Knife won't follow The Golden Compass, and there's a good chance we won't get more Narnia, but there's a difference between almost flops and the most successful franchise ever. And if this rationale is true, that's just silly. The mere act of adapting books for the big screen means that the books have to wrap up before the movies do.