Top 10 Most Historically Inaccurate Costumes in Movies

A lot of care was taken to make the “Indiana Jones” movies as historically accurate as possible – aside from all the magical artifacts – but a few errors did slip under the radar. While the uniforms the Nazi soldiers wear throughout are genuine and were retrieved from Eastern Europe, a lot of them date from World War II, complete with combat medals and decorations. The only problem is that the movie is set in 1938, before the war began, and many of the medals worn hadn’t been designed yet – nor had the officers even had the opportunity to win them.

This iconic movie may be set in the past, but filmmakers just couldn’t leave the the future behind. Throughout the romantic drama, Baby can be seen wearing a pair of denim short shorts. We may not think much of this now, but if you wore those shorts in the ‘60s you’d get a few strange looks because jeans short like these weren’t yet in style this early in the decade. The movie came out in the ‘80s, and jorts only really started to gain popularity in the ‘70s at the earliest, so having Baby wearing them is an anachronism – that, or she’s just invented a popular trend way too early. Though it’s hard to stay mad when Baby’s fashion sense has endured so well.

Any Tudor historian would be able to unleash a barrage of criticism on this movie’s historical accuracy, such as the fact Anne Boleyn is more commonly accepted to be the younger sibling. But in the costume department, the biggest offender is the French Hoods, incorrectly worn in many scenes. The purpose of a French Hood was to hide most of a woman’s hair (except for a bit of the front) with an attached veil. In “The Other Boleyn Girl”, the French hoods become glorified headbands that show off the hair they’re intended to hide. But bizarrely, sometimes they do get it right, making you wonder why they chose to be wrong so frequently.

Considering Lizzie Bennet often goes for walks outside, sometimes in the rain and mud, it only makes sense for her to wear a practical pair of shoes - like waterproof Wellington boots. Unfortunately, the movie is set around 1790, while the book was set and published in the 1810s. Wellington boots weren’t really popularized until the first Duke of Wellington, whom they’re named for, defeated Napoleon at Waterloo, in 1815. After that, they did become a popular choice in sensible footwear for the aristocracy, but Lizzie simply would not have owned a pair if the movie was accurate. Even Jane Austen, who died in 1817, probably didn’t have a pair either.

Michael Bay’s epic war movie might be about a pivotal moment in American history, but that didn’t stop him from taking liberties with the accuracy of what was put on screen. One of the chief offenders is that none of the women in the film are ever wearing stockings. Going out with bare legs would not have been done in the 1940s even if you were in Hawaii’s tropical climate. In fact, women depended on nylon stockings so much that there were riots over stocking shortages due to rationing in the mid-40s, when 40,000 women in Pittsburgh fought over 13,000 pairs of stockings. They were even sold on the black market. The women in “Pearl Harbor” just would not have gone without.

This dramatization of the life of Mozart plays fast and loose with the truth, including the rivalry between Mozart and Salieri – they were friends in real life. But the costuming is far from perfect too, which is an even bigger crime when you consider the movie won the Oscar for Best Costume Design in 1985. They certainly don’t hold up a few decades later. But even if you don’t have a background in costuming, you’ll still be able to spot zippers in a few scenes, which weren’t invented until the 1890s, first appearing at the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair, over 100 years after Mozart’s death.

This historical disaster flick may have been largely forgettable, but don’t think we missed this glaring error. Kiefer Sutherland’s Senator Corvus is certainly imposing, but even he wouldn’t have dared break a law supposedly lain down by Emperor Nero himself. As soon as Nero got into power, he made it completely illegal for anyone except the emperor to wear purple, because purple dye was so expensive to produce that it was the ultimate status symbol. If Corvus had really dared to wear purple, you can bet he wouldn’t have stayed a senator for long, since among other things Nero was famous for elaborate torture methods and was even accused of starting the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD.

It’s clear that they paid a lot of attention to history while making “The Last Samurai”, though there are aspects that remain controversial. Notably, the samurai are shown to be opposed to the westernization of Japan because they see it as harming Japanese culture, while in reality they didn’t like their power being taken away. The samurai weren’t as tied to tradition as they seem in the movie, and the armor they, and Tom Cruise, wear during the final battle had already been abandoned a long time ago because it didn’t offer protection against guns. The Japanese - though not necessarily samurais themselves - had been using guns for centuries by the 1870s, just like in this climactic battle.

The unique sunglasses Django dons might look cool, but unfortunately, they didn’t exist in 1858 when the movie is set. While there were primitive attempts to make eyewear that protected from the sun in the early 20th century, they weren’t mass-produced until 1929, and familiar styles like Django’s wouldn’t have cropped up until years later. However, this is far from a mistake but an intentional anachronism on costume designer Sharen Davis’ part, and serves as a reference to the distinct sunglasses Wild Bill Hickok sports in “The White Buffalo.” When Tarantino later found out that the sunglasses were part of spaghetti western history, he loved it.

Before we unveil our top pick, here are a few Honorable Mentions:

Peggy’s Hair Should be Tied Up
“Captain America: The First Avenger” (2011)

The Pink Dress
“Singin’ in the Rain” (1952)

Steve McQueen’s Whole Outfit
“The Great Escape” (1963)

Wrong Kilt
“The King’s Speech” (2010)

Black Sabbath T-Shirt
“Almost Famous” (2000)

Described as one of the most historically inaccurate movies ever made, there are a lot of issues with “Braveheart.” But the offense that concerns us here is William Wallace’s trademark outfit – a messy combination of things that were already outdated and other things that didn’t exist yet. Kilts, for instance, might be emblematic of Scottish culture, but they weren’t invented for some 400 years after Wallace’s death. Meanwhile, the woad, or blue face paint, hadn’t been used for nearly 1000 years; Julius Caesar described the Celts as painting themselves with woad in the 1st Century BC, but modern scholars even question whether he was talking about woad or copper, since woad ink burns the skin.