I was recently watching a movie set in ancient China when I though oh yeah, this is set in ancient china, all the women really would have been horribly crippled and not really able to walk around 'cause they'd all have had their feet bound and got kinda depressed because

a) foot binding was horrible and

b) that meant that basically every movie set in that time period I had watched was not historically accurate in a big way.

I guess my question more broadly is, was foot binding a common enough practice that movies set in ancient China are not historically accurate unless basically all the upper class women have bound feet? I guess it depends pretty heavily on the time period, as from what I understand the popularity of foot binding shifted over time and wasn't a thing that has been practiced in China since the beginnings of the culture, but was invented rather more recently.

Fake edit: I did a bit of research and it looks like the movie I watched (painted skin) was set in the Qin dynasty which was before the advent of foot-binding around the Song dynasty. so I guess that movie is accurate, but for movies set after the Song dynasty, would it be historically accurate if foot-binding was not portrayed as ubiquitous amongst the upper classes?