So, have no fear, you aren’t the only one accidentally flashing your private parts. Even in the glamorous world of Hollywood, fashion can go havoc. Continue reading to see some of the worst wardrobe blunders in movie history.
Raiders of the Lost Ark: Jeans and 1980s Fashion Don't Fit In Indiana Jones' 1930s Setting
You might not consciously notice extras when you’re watching movies, but they are there, in all their glory waiting for their few seconds of fame. And not only are they there, but they contribute a lot to the atmosphere of a film. They help viewers gain a sense of the setting of the film and its era. Therefore, it’s important to also set requirements for the actors’ clothing. In this film, one extra seemed to have slipped under the radar and not follow suit with others.
If you watch the film enough and pay close attention, you’ll notice that among the tapestry and other extras dressed appropriately for 1936, you’ll see a man standing in his jeans. They are nice jeans and all, for 1981. But, for 1936, the jeans and this man, seem very out of place.
My Girl: Mood Rings Weren't Popular Yet
In 1991, My Girl was released. While it did have some pretty big actors, like Anna Chlumsky, Macaulay Culkin, and Jamie Lee Curtis, some critics loved it while others hated it. One thing that the film succeeded in doing is enveloping its viewers in a 1970s nostalgia. But, if you noticed one particularly misplaced accessory, you might have lost track of the sense of the 70s for a second.
The mood ring that Vada (portrayed by Anna Chlumsky) wears is a great piece, especially for a young girl. Who doesn’t love a mood ring, a device which is able to determine whether you’re happy or sad? But, unfortunately for the film’s accuracy, mood rings weren’t in existence until 1975 and not in 1972, when the movie is set to take place.
Braveheart: Kilts Weren't A Thing Yet In The 1200s
This 1995 epic war film was a huge hit that provided people with a lot of enjoyment. And enjoy they did. The film received positive reviews from critics who praised the actors’ performances. It grossed $210.4 million worldwide against a $75.6 million budget. At the 68th Academy Awards, the film was nominated for ten awards and won five of them.
Mel Gibson directed and starred in it as the amazing William Wallace, a steely Scottish knight. He surely looked dashing in that kilt. While we know that looks are important, for the sake of historical accuracy, Gibson and his fellow men should have gone without the kilts. While nothing says Scottish like a good ol’ kilt, Scottish people haven’t always rocked the kilt. The kilt came out much later in time, and not in 1280, the year during which the film takes place.
Unforgiven: Hackman's Pants Had Loopholes
1992’s Unforgiven was a big commercial success. Although it had a small budget of $14 million, it made over $159 at the box office. It was nominated for four Academy Awards, 4 of which it won. Among those awards, it won for Best Picture, making it the third Western film to win this award.
But don’t be mistaken by its success. The film still has its faults, as minor as they are. Let’s take Gene Hackman, for example. Sure, he gave an outstanding performance as “Little” Bill Dagget, but one part of his wardrobe leaves us questioning the decisions made by the costume designer of the film. Let’s take his character’s pants with loopholes. These types of pants did not exist in 1880, the year during which the film is meant to take place. Fortunately, the film is that great so we forgive this error.
Forrest Gump: The Iron Has A Life Of Its Own
The 1994 comedy-drama film Forrest Gump is repeatedly on lists of the greatest films ever made. Another successful film directed by Robert Zemeckis, it was a huge success at the box office and earned over $677 million. The naivety of the lead character, Forrest Gump, which was portrayed by Tom Hanks, stole the hearts of both viewers and critics alike. It also did exceptionally well at award shows, winning an Academy Award for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor for Hanks, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Visual Effects, and Best Film Editing. It took home other awards including Golden Globes.
And despite its incontestable success, the movie contains several inaccuracies that probably only a die-hard fan who's watched the film multiple times would pick up on. For example, during the scene where Forrest reunites with his love interest, Jenny, and meets his son for the first time, a clothes iron can be seen standing upright on an ironing board. However, in the next shot, it is already laying flat. How was it able to move so fast?
Pulp Fiction: Bullet Holes Before The Bullets
The 1994 American crime film Pulp Fiction was a major critical and commercial success. It received seven Oscar nominations and won for Best Original Screenplay. Travolta, Jackson, and Thurman were all nominated for Oscars for their performances. It’s safe to say that the film completely revitalized their careers and brought them worldwide fame. The film, which marked an important turning point in film culture, is widely regarded as Tarantino’s masterpiece. Its award-winning screenplay introduced some of the most famous one-liners in film history and is Tarantino’s most quotable film. And yet, despite the film’s success, it is not without errors.
In the film’s most famous scene, when Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield attempt to collect Marsellus Wallace’s suitcase from Brett’s apartment, a surprise assailant jumps out and tries to shoot them with a gun. The shots miss, and Vega and Winnfield kill the assailant and Winnfield concludes it as divine intervention and begins citing biblical verses. If you watch carefully, you will notice that before the bullets start being fired, there are already bullet holes on the wall behind Jules and Vincent.
Gladiator: Russell Crowe's Lycra Shorts
We have no problem giving credit where it is deserved. It definitely took a lot of talent to master the fight scenes in this 2000 action film. Making sure that each move looks realistic but still flows smoothly and guaranteeing that actors are under safe conditions is not an easy task. But, there is one blooper that most viewers overlook in the film.
When Russell Crowe fell, viewers can see his lycra shorts. While there’s nothing like a man in some lycra wear, nobody in ancient Rome would have been wearing Lycra shorts. Even if they wanted to wear it underneath their armor, those shorts didn’t exist in those times. And sorry to say, but the ancient Romans definitely missed out!
Seabiscuit: The Strapped Helmets Didn't Exist Yet
Everybody loves a good horse movie, especially when it involves a race to victory. The 2003 equestrian sports film Seabiscuit is based on the life and racing career of Seabiscuit, who experienced unexpected success. He was a popular media sensation in the U.S. during the Great Depression. The movie fared pretty well with critics as well as with moviegoers. It was nominated for seven Academy Awards. Tobey Maguire starred in the film as Red Pollard.
As touching as the film was, it was still ridden with flaws. The historical event takes place during the time of The Great Depression. Yet, the jockeys in the film wear strapped helmets that definitely did not exist during that time. But you know what the say, it’s better to be safe than sorry and it looks like the producers wanted to adhere to this.
The Wedding Singer: Drew's Short Hair Wasn't Typical Of The 80s
The 1998 music-filled romantic comedy, The Wedding Singer attracted a large fan base, many thanks to Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore. While it didn’t receive rave reviews from critics, it performed very well at the box office, making $100 million against its humble $18 million budget. In the film, Drew Barrymore plays a waitress named Julia in the film.
The Wedding Singer is set in the ’80s. One small inaccuracy in the film doesn’t have to do with wardrobe, like most others on this list. But, the short hairstyle that Barrymore dons isn’t a very fitting style for the ’80s. It seems like a bit of the 90s snuck its way into the film.
Catch Me If You Can: Adams' Braces Didn't Exist At The Time
Braces seem to be the perfect addition to further encourage a character's naive and shy persona. It makes the smile they flash all the more adorable and quirky. This was surely the case with Brenda (played by Amy Adams) in 2002’s Catch Me If You Can. Despite the film being a financial and critical success, producers overlooked this; these types of braces worn by Brenda weren’t around during the time the film took place.
Catch Me If You Can is set in 1963. However, Amy Adams wears stick-on braces that didn’t become mainstream until the late 1970s, so it might have been unlikely that someone would have braces like that. Still, the film received favorable views, from even the harshest critics.
The Ten Commandments: Underwire Bras And Blue Dresses In Ancient Egypt? We Don't Think So...
Even during Biblical times, women needed the support of a well-fitted bra. So, in biblical films, it’s no surprise that females in the movie would be donning a bra. In the 1956 film The Ten Commandments, Nefretiri (played by Anne Baxter) looks dashing in her exquisite jewelry and sheer blue dress.
While she had most viewers mesmerized by her beauty, she definitely had her female viewers thinking something else as well. As stunning as she looked in the sheer dress, she could have benefited from a better bra, and the editing of the film could have used better censors. Regardless, Baxter’s lacy bra is clearly visible through the thin material of her dress. The color of the dress is also not so relevant to the time period, as it would have been virtually impossible during those times to get a color like that. One might say that Nefretiri is a trendsetter.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: Nazis Didn't Have Medals Pinned Onto Their Uniforms Back Then
It’s no secret that the Indiana Jones franchise was a huge commercial success. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade was released in 1989 and was a great addition to the franchise. It received raving reviews from critics. It made over $474 million at the box office against a $50 million budget. Despite its success, there was one historical accuracy that was quite obvious.
The Nazis in the film look pretty convincing thanks to their uniforms. But, one accessory on their uniforms wouldn’t have been around at the time, as the film shows. The medals pinned to the nazis’ chests didn’t come to fruition until the end of the war, however, the film takes place in the middle of the war.
The Doors: An 80s Ray Ban Sunglasses Model In A 60s Film
We just have to point out that something in this film did not exist during the time that it is meant to take place. What’s more is that there are some sunglasses in the film that seem very out of place, despite that Val Kilmer wears them quite well and pulls off a convincing Jim Morrison.
1991’s The Doors is based on a true story. It follows the life of Jim Morrison and his timeless band The Doors. In the film, Jim Morrison can be seen wearing Ray-Ban sunglasses. But, the model that he wears was released only in the 80s, which means it was more than a decade later than Jim Morrison’s death in the 70s. Most of the film took place in the 60s so they seemed to have stretched several decades into a short film.
Singin’ in the Rain: Beautiful Dress, But Not For The 1920s
The 1952 musical-romantic comedy film portrayed Hollywood in the late 20s. While the film was only a modest hit when it was first released, it has since received the title of the best film musical ever made and has a score of 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. The film gets even the most forbidding of souls singing along with it. But, despite its perfection according to Rotten Tomatoes, the film contains one inaccuracy, which for the sake of our list, prevents it from being entirely perfect.
Debbie Reynolds, who played the part of Kathy Selden, gave a legendary performance. While her acting and singing skills were on point, the same cannot be said of her wardrobe. During one scene, one of her outfits clashed with the time period of the 1920s. Reynolds sported a pink dress, which fit her like a glove and flaunted her figure, yet didn’t fit the setting of the movie and the fashion trends that would have been popular at the time.
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves: Telescopes Didn't Exist In The 12th Century
When Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves was released in 1991, it wasn’t received so well by critics. But, it did take in a nice $390.5 million at the box office.
But, one small detail bewildered viewers. During one scene, Robin Hood’s friend is quite captivated by a telescope. He shows Robin Hood with a spark in his eye. While the scene is charming, it’s far from accurate. The telescope wouldn’t have existed during the film’s time, which was set in the year 1194. The telescope wasn’t invented until the 17th century.
Back to the Future: Marty Plays A Non-Existent Guitar
“Great movie, but–that did not exist back then!” As you probably know by now, this was the case with many popular movies. And yes, this is unfortunately what we have to say about Robert Zemeckis’ 1985 classic Back to the Future. Sure, the movie was a huge commercial success that grossed over $381 million worldwide. It was the highest-grossing film of the wear and won the Academy Award for Best Sound Effects Editing. However, that doesn’t mean that it didn’t have its flaws.
The science-fiction adventure film stars Michael J. Fox as Marty McFly, who accidentally travels back in time to 1955. You must have thought that Marty had an aptitude for the guitar. And there’s no doubt that he did. Nobody else could have played “Johnny B. Goode” quite as well as him. And there’s a good reason for that. The amazing Gibson ES-345 guitar didn’t exist in 1955. The guitar came out only in 1958. So it seems that he would have needed to time travel to get his hands on the futuristic guitar.
Pride and Prejudice: Rubber Boots Didn't Exist In 1810
Pride and Prejudice, the film, was released in 2005. It is of course based on the Jane Austen novel with the same title. The film strayed a bit from the novel’s details, as films often do, which is understandable. But, it’s harder to justify the film also drifting from historical facts.
Do you recall those trendy rubber boots that Lizzie (played by Keira Knightley) wore in the film? Those actually didn’t exist in Jane Austen’s time at all. Jane Austen passed away in 1817 when people definitely weren’t moseying around in rubber boots. Rubber boots were first invented in 1852. Luckily, this detail is quite minor and for most of the film, they are hidden beneath Lizzie’s long dress.
Pulp Fiction: Split-second Peep Show
Quentin Tarantino’s 1994 crime film classic is known for many things, like famous one-liners, dance moves, and even a signature Mexican standoff. But, it isn’t known for its actors showing too much skin. You would actually be surprised to know that Butch Coolidge, portrayed by Bruce Willis, unintentionally exposed himself while filming.
While Butch is talking to his girlfriend Fabienne after he takes a shower, he naturally dries off with a towel. But, when he goes to wipe his face with the towel, he pulls the towel away from his body for a second and unintentionally gives viewers a showing of his downstairs region.
Pearl Harbor: Women's Bare Legs Were Rarely Seen In The 1940s
Pearl Harbor is a 2001 romantic period war drama film that starred Ben Affleck and Kate Beckinsale, among others. The film is based on the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. When you’re basing a film on an actual event, every detail is important. The details can make all the difference between engaging your audience and creating an authentic film to losing your audience completely. Pearl Harbor got negative reviews from critics and transparent flaws, both plot-based and historical, are one of the reasons why. But, there was one wardrobe-related flaw in particular which many people may have actually overlooked.
Of course, Pearl Harbor is set during World War II. The attack took place in 1941, during a time when women would have dressed in a certain manner. If you pay close enough attention, you will notice that the girls in the film were with their legs bare. But, women during this time period would never have been seen like this. They would have been wearing nylon stocking or painted on stockings with a line down the back of the legs considering that nylon was in short supply.
Django Unchained: Django's Shady (Not At All Accurate) Shades
Quentin Tarantino’s 2012 Django Unchained had quite the talented cast, including Jamie Foxx, Leonardo DiCaprio, Kerry Washington, and Samuel L. Jackson. It’s no surprise that the film won several awards, as Tarantino directs a mean film. Django Unchained is packed with action and suspect and sunglasses, what? While Jamie Foxx looks very profound in those shades, and it adds to the look of his character, there is a problem with this. These sunglasses wouldn’t have existed during those times.
As fans of the film know, it takes place in 1858, shortly before the start of the American Civil War. People at that time would have been eager to get their hands on a pair of sunglasses so as to protect themselves from the scorching Texas sun. But, realistically, it would have made more sense for Django to go without sunglasses and be left to do what everyone else did at the time- squint through the haze of the sun. But, Jamie Foxx does pull off the look we must admit.
Spartan: The Boob-Exposing Punch
2004's political thriller, Spartan, was directed by David Mamet. It starred a bunch of talented names like Val Kilmer, Ed O’Neill, William H. Macy, and Kristen Bell. Kristin Bell makes it on our list as yet another victim of a wardrobe malfunction.
In the movie, Kristen Bell plays the role of Laura Newton, the President’s daughter who goes missing. In one of the scenes, Bell is punched by another man. The punch is so hard that it ends up exposing some of Kristin Bell's breast.
Schindler’s List: Most Women Didn't Shave Back Then - Especially During WWII
The 1993 Spielberg directed Schindler’s list follows the life of Oskar Schindler, a German businessman who saved the lives of thousands of Polish-Jewish refugees from the Holocaust by giving them jobs in his factories during WWII. The film fared very well at the box office, earning $322 million worldwide against a $22 million budget. Critics also perceived it well. It was nominated for 12 Academy Awards, seven of which is won. It is often perceived as one of the best films ever made. And still, despite its success, there is still something off in the film that we must point out.
You may have noticed that the women in the film have clean-shaven legs. You may also notice that they lack armpit hair. While nowadays, this would hold true as realistic, in those days, women walked around happy with their bodily hair.
Pompeii: You Couldn't Wear Purple Next To Emperor Nero!
When you are more concerned with an entire civilization potentially wiping out from a volcano, fashion is definitely the last thing on your mind. And therefore, it’s the perfect opportunity for us to go ahead and point out a historical inaccuracy from 2014’s Pompeii.
While the generals in the film may have felt very bold in their gaudy purple garbs, this is actually a deviance from history. Generals would never have been found wearing purple next to Nero. And if so, they would have definitely been done with.
Where Eagles Dare: A Hairstyle Ahead Of Its Time
The 1968 "Where Eagles Dare" was a big commercial success. The British WWII action film stars Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood. The movie nowadays is considered to be quite the classic and is noted for the phrase "Broadsword calling Danny Boy." While it's a great movie, it’s yet another war film that slightly veered from the style of the time period, particularly in regard to the hairstyles of some of the characters in the film.
Heidi, who was played by Ingrid Pitt, sported quite an interesting hairdo. It did not seem at all fitting for the time period, and that’s because it wasn’t. While the hairstyle would have fared well in a film set in the 60s, it simply just seemed off in the time of WWII.
Amadeus: Zippers Weren't Invented Until 1918
This 1984 film is widely considered to be one of the best films of all time. It received 53 awards nominations and won 40 of them, 8 of which were Academy Awards and 4 Golden Globe Awards. Despite this, even the most dedicated fans are not able to look past the creative liberties the director took. To say the least, the film was hardly lacking historical inaccuracies. Most critics were highly impressed with the film, but some definitely were soured by the way that Mozart was portrayed as an imbecile during parts of the film.
One historical mishap that people may have overlooked was the zippers that dancers donned on their outfits. Zippers weren’t invented until the early 1900s. They clearly didn’t exist during Mozart’s years in the late 1700s. So Mozart could have even lived longer than his young age of 35 and still it wouldn’t have been until 1918 that the invention would come to life.
Troy: Umbrellas In Ancient Troy?... Not So Much
While 2004's Troy didn't fare so well with critics, it was pretty successful at the box office. It grossed nearly $500 million on a $175 million budget. The film was inspired by Homer's great Iliad, which gave it an epic “everything-must-be-big-and-grand” sort of feel to it. It had watchers completely convinced and enthralled in the war scenes until one particular scene.
During the scene, the character Paris, which was played by Orlando Bloom, stands under a pink parasol umbrella. When put like that, you’re probably wondering what in the world a pink umbrella was doing in the middle of a movie like this. And that’s exactly our point. In reality, Homeric warriors weren't privy to such frilly luxuries.
The Last Samurai: A 17th Century Armor For A 19th Century Samurai
2006’s drama war film, The Last Samurai did well at the box office, making a total of $456 million. The film was received well upon its release and was praised for the acting, writing, directing, score, visuals, and costumes. Generally speaking, it’s a good movie that avoids major errors. But, there is still one thing that most viewers overlook.
In the film, viewers see Tom Cruise’s character Captain Nathan Algren decked out in detailed samurai gear. While it seems fitting for a samurai to wear this and it does look good, a warrior during this time period wouldn’t be wearing this. The film takes place in 1876, and yet the armor dates back to 1600. So, by the film’s time, the armor would have been outdated.
There Will Be Blood: Day-Lewis' Boots Have Waffle Soles, Which Didn't Exist In The 1800s
With this next mistake, you really would need a good eye to catch it. This movie masterpiece received significant critical praise, particularly for the performance of Day-Lewis as Daniel Plainview. 2007’s There Will Be Blood follows the quest of a silver-miner who becomes an oilman on his search for wealth during Southern California’s oil boom of the late 19th century. Despite critical praise that the film received and 2 Oscars, we are going to nit-pick because that’s what we came here to do.
So, if you are as detailed as we are, you would have noticed that the bottom of character Daniel Plainview’s boots contradicts history. The pattern on the soles belonged to a type of shoe called waffle shoes, and they weren't around in the late 19th century, which is the time in which the film is set. Still, the flaw is insignificant when considering what a masterpiece the film is.
Saving Private Ryan: Soldiers Mostly Wore Brown Boots In WWII, Not Black
Steven Spielberg’s 1998 epic war film Saving Private Ryan is a classic World War II film. It is gory, graphic, and has many intense scenes. The film received universal acclaim from both critics and audiences and grossed $481.8 million worldwide. It proceeded to be a big presence at the Academy Awards, receiving 11 nominations and claiming several of them. Despite the film’s undeniable success, there is one inaccuracy that most people overlook.
Saving Private Ryan has many scenes where rough, frantic soldiers are just doing their jobs. Most people overlook this error because of this and it’s pretty hard to catch. So what error are we referring to? The soldiers' boots, during this time period, they would have been jump boots.
Gangs of New York: Inaccurate Firefighter Uniforms
Martin Scorsese’s Gangs of New York, which was released in 2002, had some pretty huge actors in its cast like Daniel Day-Lewis, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Cameron Diaz, just to name a few. The film is set in the New York slums in 1863 and is inspired by the non-fiction book, The Gangs of New York. The film follows the New York Draft Riots, which erupted into violence in 1863. Scorsese spent nearly twenty years working on the project until 1999 when Harvey Weinstein acquired it. It was finally released in 2002 and grossed $193 million against a $100 million budget. The film was nominated for ten Oscars.
For the most part, Gangs of New York succeeds in staying historically accurate. But, there was one minor detail overlooked by producers. The firemen in the film sport uniforms that aren’t so different than what firemen wear today. Considering that the movie took place in 1863, it’s safe to assume that firefighter uniforms looked much different.
I Dream of Jeannie: You Can See The Stand-in's Face
Jeannie the genie (portrayed by Barbara Eden) and her mortal husband Tony (portrayed by Larry Hagman) enthralled audiences on the hit show I Dream of Jeannie. They cracked up the world with their mischievous and rowdy ways in the 1960s. Despite this, more observant fans of the show noticed something different in the episode called “My Sister, the Homemaker” during Season 5. Something seemed off.
During this episode, Barbara Eden played Jeannie and her evil brunette twin sister. In order for both characters to be on screen at the same time, a stand-in was used. Of course, the face of the stand-in was supposed to be covered in order to make the illusion successful. But, at one point in the episode, viewers are able to see the stand-in entirely. Whoops!
I Know What You Did Last Summer: Unintentional Peep Show
Those who are fans of horror films most likely overlooked this wardrobe malfunction, especially if they were enthralled by the next moment of gore. And yet, the scene went on long enough to make some viewers notice and others trying to catch a better view.
During one scene, Sarah Michelle Gellar’s character, Helen is climbing a rope. The scene seems innocent until the perspective of the camera shifts and the cameraman takes some creative liberties. As Gellar reaches for the rope, her poorly fitted dress lets the audience see exactly that which the dress is attempting to hide.
Julius Caesar: No Bullet Bras In The Times Of Julius Caesar
This 1953 adaptation of the Shakespearean play did pretty well in the box office and with critics. It won a few Academy Awards, including one for Best Picture. But most viewers overlooked one small historical accuracy. So, we thought we’d point it out for you.
As you can see from the picture above, the woman is wearing a supportive bra. While most of the time, bras remain under a woman’s shirt and aren’t visible, bullet bras have quite the opposite effect. They protrude quite obviously through clothing. This isn’t a problem at all unless you take into consideration the time period of Julius Caesar. If you think about it, this wasn’t exactly a time period when bras were available in so many different shapes and colors.
Glory: A Digital Watch In The 1800s
"Glory" is a 1989 war film that starred Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, and Morgan Freeman. The film takes place during the American Civil War and follows one of the first military units of the Union Army to consist entirely of African-American men, other than its officers. The film fared very well with critics and was nominated for five Academy Awards, three of which it won. Those critics may have overlooked one flaw in the film. In the film, a soldier can be seen flaunting a piece of technology that was definitely not available during those times.
There was one soldier in particular who was positioned in the foreground with his arm in the air. Around his wrist, you will notice a shiny digital watch. You would think that an actor would remove his watch before taking his place on set. Or that somebody else would have at least seen the detail and spoken up. But alas, nobody did and it serves as some humor in the middle of a dark film.
The Terminator: Arnie Goes Full Monty
The classic 1984 science fiction film helped establish James Cameron’s directing career while solidifying Arnold Schwarzenegger's acting film. You might be surprised to hear that even the former Governor of California had a bad wardrobe malfunction. In one of the scenes, the governor walks on punks without any clothes on. While the scene is shot from a distance, viewers still see a bit more of Arnie than you thought.
Because the movie was filmed in the 80s, its quality wasn’t great and therefore, you couldn’t see much. But if you get the Blu-ray version, you’re in for quite the treat.
Gallipoli: Gibson's Privates Slipped Out
In this 1981 Australian war film, 25-year-old Mel Gibson stars as Frank Dunne, an unemployed young man who enlists in the Australian Army during the First World War. Dunne and his friend are sent to fight in Gallipoli. The movie shows the men slowly lose their innocence regarding the purpose of war. This was one of Gibson’s first films. The movie changes certain events for dramatic purposes and thus contains a number of obvious historical inaccuracies.
While this movie drama helped define Gibson’s role as a serious actor, he suffered a significant wardrobe malfunction during filming- when he goes for a swim with several other soldiers, some of his private parts are exposed.
Titanic: The Ever-Changing Beauty Mark On Rose's Face
James Cameron’s 1997 Titanic was a huge critical and commercial success. Kate Winslet and Leonardo Dicaprio took the world by storm with their performances and their romance stole many people's’ hearts along the way. The film was nominated for a whopping 14 Academy Awards and grossed more than $1.84 billion, making it the first film to surpass the billion-dollar mark. And yet, with such success, you would think that the makeup team would have been of the highest quality, no?
Well, they did do a pretty remarkable job, but they made one quite humorous mistake when they switched Rose Dawson’s face around. When Rose Dawson, played by Kate Winslet, first appears in the movie, her beauty mark is on the left side of her face. But, in other scenes, it moves to the right. Magic or just a fault of the makeup artists?
Sense and Sensibility: Modern Diapers In The 19th Century?
Jane Austen’s novel, Sense and Sensibility, came to life on the big screen in 1995. The drama film which was directed by Ang Lee starred Kate Winslet, Elinor Dashwood, and Hugh Grant. The film was a masterpiece, to say the least, and was nominated for seven Academy Awards. Despite its success, nitpicky fans aren’t able to ignore one historical inaccuracy in the film.
The inaccuracy we are referring to involved an adorable baby who is all bundled up. Nothing seems wrong until you notice something very out of place; the baby is doting a modern-day diaper! This sort of luxury clearly would not have existed in those times and doesn’t fit with the 19th-century setting that the film does a good job at creating.
Vanilla Sky: The Accidental Slip
This 2001 psychological sci-fi thriller is jam-packed with action. It has the viewer glued to the screen waiting to see what will go down next. In one particular scene, character David (played by Tom Cruise) has Julie (played by Cameron Diaz) captured and securely tied down to the bed. She isn’t wearing much other than a sheer gown.
As Cameron moves around, the top of her gown falls, revealing her breast. She takes notice of this and quickly shrugs her shoulders so that the gown falls back into place. Regardless of this slip-up, the scene got past multiple sets of eyes and into the theater straight to audiences around the globe. Considering that Cameron Diaz was nominated for both a Screen Actors Guild and Golden Globe Award for her performance, we guess the wardrobe malfunction must have done her well.
The Color Purple: No Clip-on Ties In 1916
This is another successful film adapted from a great novel. Alice Walker published The Color Purple in 1982. The movie adaptation was released a few years after that. Due to the small window of years in between the novel and film, there wasn’t so much room for messing up the tone of Walker’s novel and viewers were sure to notice. While the film turned out to be a great success, there is still one thing that viewers may have picked up on.
Albert, who’s played by Danny Glover, sports a clip-on tie. Sure, it’s a nice tie. But, this wouldn’t have existed a decade earlier. The clip-on tie didn’t come into existence until the late 1920s. The Color Purple, on the other hand, takes place in 1916.
Pretty Woman: You Can See Her Entire Breast!
Julia Roberts had a pretty horrific wardrobe malfunction that left her body entirely exposed. This is ironic considering that Julia Roberts stood firmly against nude scenes during her career. Nudity is not her thing, she told E! News. But, in the 1990 romantic comedy directed by Garry Marshall, her values were put to a test.
During one scene, Vivian (played by Roberts) wears a thin gown, revealing much of what’s lies under the sheer material. One can safely assume that this wasn’t a part of the script, considering Roberts’ stance against nude scenes. After Roberts is seen in her gown, viewers can actually see one of her breasts quite visibly.
The Notebook: James Marsden's Hair Is Constantly Changing Color
Regarded as one of the best romantic comedies by many women out there, 2004’s The Notebook huddled together many girls for movie night and many couples (not by the men’s choice.) But, this favorite romantic comedy still has its faults, despite its success at the box office and cult following.
Many loved the film thanks to the passionate love that Noah and Allie have for one another. And yet, others are drawn to the film because of the wealthy Lon Hammond, Jr. He looks great, there’s no denouncing that. But, his hair seems to have a special power which leaves even the most sparkling of vampires in despair. From shot to shot, his hair seems to make the impossible, possible and changes colors from black to brown. If you are able to look past that and enjoy the movie for what it is, then you might thoroughly enjoy yourself.
Closer: Portman's Bra Goes On Strike
If you thought that bra malfunctions on the list were over, you’re mistaken. In this 2004 star-powered film, Natalie Portman joins the rankings of wardrobe malfunctions with some trouble in the bra department. While you would expect the character to show some skin considering that she plays a prostitute, the young actress hadn’t before shown more than a little of her stomach or cleavage.
But, in one scene in the film, while Portman is having a conversation, she has a wardrobe malfunction when her bra goes on strike, leaving her to show more than she would have preferred to show. This goes without saying that more was shown than the actress or director had expected.
Hello, Dolly! - A Change Of Dress That Was Way Too Fast
Many people were a fan of this 1969 romantic comedy musical film which was directed by the great Gene Kelly. The film won three Oscars and four Academy Awards. Despite this, it wasn’t a big commercial success. And still, many people loved the costumes and glittery dresses which perfectly fit the film’s time period of 1890. And yet, despite the exquisiteness of the outfits, there was something particularly off with one beautiful dress. It seemed to be transformed in only a few seconds.
What we are referring to is one scene where Cornelius (played by Michael Crawford) is dancing with a girl who is decked out beautifully in an extravagant red dress. During this scene, it is quite obvious that the dress has its flaws as is seen by the hem dragging on the pavement, and thus dirtying the bottom of the dress. During the next scene, the girl notices that her dress is dirty so she sets off to change into something cleaner. This happened in a very short span of time. While this is a tiny detail, it nonetheless is a flaw that is worth noting.
Pirates of the Caribbean III: Singapore Wasn't Called Singapore
The Pirates of the Caribbean franchise has grossed over $4.5 billion worldwide, making it the 14th highest-grossing film series of all time. The film series has had people hooked from its first release in 2003 with Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. This first film grossed $654 million worldwide. The films continued to see success and the next film, which was released 3 years later, earned almost $1.1 billion at the worldwide box office. The third film, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, was released in 2007.
During this film, the Black Pearl crew are on their way to Singapore in the 1700s. However, all history fanatics out there will know that the area we know today as Singapore wasn’t Singapore at that time. It wasn’t named Singapore until 1819 when the British established a trading post there. When the movie took place, the area was ruled by Johor Sultanate, which consisted of parts of modern Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia. This historical oversight is overshadowed by all the great things the films manage to do, like combine horror, romance, and comedy to create something very unique.