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 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 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.
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.
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.
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. Nothing says Scottish like a good ol’ kilt, but 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.
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.