Seriously what a rediculous film. I came in on the final third and was perplexed as to why people attired in 70's fashions were battling the Fuhrers finest. I thought it was a movie about time travel or a Wehrmacht redoubt whose garrison had never been told the war had ended. Seriously the period anachronisms are f_ucking ludicrous. Should have been titled WW2 Ad.1972.
shareApparently some people don't know as much about history as they think they do. Bell-bottom trousers were not invented in the 1960's. And, they were, of course, standard attire for sailors. Anachronisms are seen in virtually every period movie, and this was no worse -- in fact much better -- than most produced in the last few years. It is actually quite commendable for staying as true as it did to the actual story.
sharewhat a dufus you are....the navy has had bell bottoms for like forever
shareI noticed another anachronism: One of the team's revolvers was a S&W "Bodyguard" model. It is very distinctive with its humpback profile caused by a hammer shroud designed to keep the hammer from snagging on clothing. It was first sold in 1955 which puts it 12 years after the movie.
Here is a link with a picture: http://www.snubnose.info/docs/bodyguard.htm
Sadly I agree. The anachronisms really are unforgiveable in this film. Barely any effort was made with hairstyles or clothing to give a period feel. I mean come on - Indians in powder blue safari suits with flared trousers, in 1943? English ladies with long frizzy hair? Army officers with bouffant hair over the ears and collar? Men in their 50s and 60s wearing 1970s style slacks with belts? And as for the sailors, they looked like they had wandered in off the set of a German porn film. It's a shame, because the film is otherwise very good.
shareAgree 100% Hugh, my friend! Love how certain moron's chose to concentrate on the "flares" and ignore the fact that practically every aspect of the production design from haircuts to vehicles are blatanty of the 1970's and not the War period.
sharePlaying Devil's Advocate for the film designers, I think it was probably partly because even in 1980 the WW2 era was still in many ways recent history (it had only ended 35 years previously, so the equivalent of 1976 today).
So the era was still a 'dated' era rather than a 'period' era, ie, it had not quite got the glow of nostalgia about it that it now has. So the styles of the forties probably looked a bit embarrassing, especially since most of the actors, crew etc had lived through that period, so they probably did not see it as a 'historical' period.
For example, if you made a film today set in 1976, I'm not sure if big name actors would go all out to look 'seventies' with big-hair wigs, sideburns, aqua polyester suits, kipper ties etc. They would probably give them a slight seventies 'look' but with a modern feel.
I'm guessing that was the main reason...in fact it wasn't really until the 1980s that very authentic 1940s/1930s period dramas began to be made, I think 'Brideshead Revisited' was probably the first really well observed one.
I think period films always tend to reflect the fashion of the time it was made and this was rather true of films made in the 70s.
Its that man again!!
I'm not sure if big name actors would go all out to look 'seventies' with big-hair wigs, sideburns, aqua polyester suits, kipper ties etc.Only if they're playing in something like American Hustle.