It's "than", not "then".
I'd say a decade, give or take, depending on fashion and stuff. I'd also say the example probably needs some details about why it's dated, so the exact time isn't as important as why it's considered dated.
Check out my fanfiction!Just bumping this in case of tropers having the threshold to add examples from before and during 2016...
ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔|I DO COMMISSIONS|ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔There also needs to be a threshold on what defines it being "clear."
I've complained about this before, and examples range from "this is clearly a product of the era" to "if you know the architectural history of the city this is set, this cannot take place after 1994 because this bridge was torn down then."
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.Not sure we should set a limit like that.
I mean seeing the World Trade Center in the NYC skyline instantly dates the work and that's the trope. While that is the extreme example anything noticeable by residents of that city instantly dates the work.
And seeing someone using a tape / CD Walkman or an 80s style Cellphone places that work instantly.
Especially when the work is set in the 'now' and no actual year is brought up.
edited 5th Jul '17 6:25:08 AM by Memers
Except "before 2001" isn't much of a period as it is an era. Saying that it narrows things down is technically true, but it doesn't narrow it down to a specific period so much as eliminates a certain period. It narrows it down as much as, say, Brooklyn Nine Nine getting narrowed down because one episode references a black man voting, therefore you can glean that it takes place after 1965.
edited 5th Jul '17 8:19:27 AM by Larkmarn
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.What if a story features two independent aspects that narrow it down to a specific period? Like, the Twin Towers are still standing in New York City, so it can't be any later than September, 2001. At the same time, ordinary people are shown using the Internet, so it has to be the early 90's at the absolute earliest. Together, those tell you that the story must be set within a specific decade.
Does that count?
I don't really see how the simple fact of featuring a no-longer-existing landmark makes a work a period piece, intentional or not. You need more than just that; the idea of the trope is that there is a certain cultural zeitgeist that's unique to the period that it's set in, which the work in question prominently features.
edited 5th Jul '17 9:51:02 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Yeah, I think for that kind of thing to be an example there should be more than a shot of the skyline or otherwise recognizable structure. The trope is that the story, characters and/or production design "betrays" when it was made. It is truthfully almost omnipresent, so examples should be extreme. Seeing an Establishing Shot of New York pre-9/11 simply says it was made pre-9/11. On the other hand, having an extended action sequence in the Twin Towers is a lot more notable.
Having an action sequence in the Twin Towers while prominently featuring clips from the Clinton presidency and making nerd jokes about how amazingly new The Wheel of Time is might get you closer to the 90's.
It may just be that I'm tired, but I spent some time beating my brain for iconic cultural events from that era...
edited 6th Jul '17 8:45:26 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I'm actually wondering now, can a work have just one thing that makes it an Unintentional Period Piece, or does it have to be something more pervasive?
Like, let's say you have a story where characters worry that Y2K is going to bring about the end of the world. That's an incredibly and unmistakably 90's thing, but if the rest of the story isn't particularly 90's-tastic, does it still count as this trope?
"A work set in the present day at the time of its creation, but is so full of the culture of the time it resembles a deliberate exaggeration of the era in a work made later."
This is the first line of the description. So unless someone could look at the work and say, "Man, that is so totally 90s," you don't have an Unintentional Period Piece.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"A one-off line of dialogue probably falls under Technology Marches On and related tropes. On the other hand, the pervasive use of the brick cell phones in Clueless is not a one-off bit but by itself really quite defines the era the film was made.
That and the writing style, the clothing, the cultural values... Clueless is a love story to a specific subculture and as such is very much a period piece whether it intended to be or not.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Looking over the Unintentional Period Piece page, I'm stumped on what isn't an example. It seems like every piece of fiction dates itself in some form or another. Either it be due to obsolete references, outdated fashion, or certain types of music. Quite a few examples are of the "This film has a lot of 80s slang and music" or "These characters clothes are so out of date" sort.
As I understand it, it's about cultural trends and cultural references. Monuments are symbols of culture and/or history, so I think that's why they count. However, if the price of gas in the background is $1.209, that may be a giant red flag that the movie was filmed during the '90s or early 2000s, but that doesn't necessarily make it an Unintentional Period Piece.
While this would make way more sense than the current nonsensical state of the page, this very discussion seems to show that there's disagreement on the subject.
Though that might be just Trope Decay, because the exaggeration part is in the definition.
I think it really depends on exactly what is in the background.
If it is something people use to set an intended period piece then it would be an example imo. Like if you hear say Johnny Carson in the background of a shot and such.
I agree with the line of thought it's when something is so much a product of it's time, be it via heavy use or pop-culture references and current events or prominently featuring dated elements of culture like tech, fashion, or vehicles.
"There's a sign in the background that dates the movie" is not blatant enough for this trope.
Pardon for necro-bumping this, but somehow, there seems to have been a misuse of the trope, especially in the 2010s section where stating one reference makes the work instantly dated, such in Crazy Rich Asians where a dress is associated with Harvey Weinstein's wife, and in Moana where Maui stealthily mentions Twitter, even though the word "twitter" predates the website.
Edited by alnair20aug93 on Aug 28th 2018 at 4:44:24 PM
ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔|I DO COMMISSIONS|ᜇᜎᜈ᜔ᜇᜈ᜔Unless there are a lot of details dating it to a certain period, it's not an example. There needs to be an overall feeling that it's dated to that period, not just a single reference or two. The trope's about a period piece, not about being able to find out when it was made. If you can remove that detail, it doesn't change anything significant in the work, and that makes it not obviously datable, it's not an example.
For relatively recent works, within a decade or so, times probably haven't changed so much there's going to be that noticeable of a difference. If the work is focused on a "current" event to the point where it actually is that easily dated it's still not an example, because that would make it an intentional period piece.
Check out my fanfiction!There's an example under the Special Cases folder, where it lists The Avengers as an example of an Unintentional Period Piece because many of their villains were Communists. While this does date the stories to the Cold War, that was a period of more than forty years.
Edited by SharkToast on Aug 28th 2018 at 8:00:13 AM
Most comic books wrote the times, their villains usually fit with the current era of the books dating them. Like after 9/11 there are a million villains that are stereotypical 'middle east terrorists' even if they are not labeled as such.
![]()
![]()
I remember reading somewhere on this site that it was specifically mentioned in the novel what it was, seeing how it came out in 2013 and book is set in 2010 it might be an intentional one. Would have to ask around to confirm either way

I recently realized that Unintentional Period Piece needs a standard threshold, as we've passed my previous, informal threshold for the 2000s. To that end, I've added the following paragraph to Unintentional Period Piece:
Important Sidenote: To avoid questionable examples, do not add a work less then 8 years old unless the situation is especially unusual. (Being completely overtaken by events by time of airing, and being called "instantly dated" by the press have both qualified in the past.)
I'm interested in whether this is the right wording, timing, and notation of what an "acceptable exception". (I chose 8 years mildly arbitrarily.)
Thanks Luc "Weight of Years" French