'Year One' Gets Its PG-13

There's been a flurry of activity this week around Year One, the Harold Ramis-directed and Judd Apatow-produced comedy starring Jack Black and Michael Cera as a pair of shiftless cavemen on a epic journey. (To see the film's kinda funny trailer, mosey on over here.)

Some time ago, the MPAA awarded the film an R rating -- something that neither Harold Ramis, Judd Apatow, Michael Cera nor Jack Black are strangers to. This Tuesday, Sony appealed, hoping to get a PG-13 without making any cuts to the film, but the MPAA stuck to the R, prompting many of the internet usual suspects to speculate that Sony would give in and release the film with the tougher rating. It wouldn't have surprised me -- Apatow has plenty of clout, and a great track record with R-rated comedies; the same, to a lesser extent, goes for Ramis. But no: Sony made cuts to the film, and merely two days after the appeal ruling, Year One is rated PG-13 "for crude and sexual content throughout, brief strong language and comic violence."

I'm not terribly chagrinned about this -- I am guessing the filmmakers trimmed a few scenes in response to the MPAA's usual nitpicking ("we'd like to see 5% less of her left boob, and 10% less dry-humping"), and in a comedy that was already on the borderline between a PG-13 and an R, I can't imagine the stuff they cut out is that crucial to quality. (Besides, Apatow could stand to make his films shorter.) I'm a little surprised though: high-profile R-rated comedies (particularly ones with Judd Apatow's name in the credits) have been enjoying enough success that there doesn't seem to be much reason to run from the rating.

One possibility is that Sony thinks it has a Bruce Almighty-caliber summer mega-hit on its hands. That seems improbable. Another is that the studio doubts the breadth of Year One's adult appeal. That could be right. Do you think Year One needs the PG-13 for commercial success?