Here's an interesting video of an Airbus A380 airliner (the largest in the world) landing in a crosswind at Düsseldorf airport in Germany. Note how the empennage, or tail assembly, continues vibrating and twisting from side to side as the aircraft decelerates after landing. That's not just wind moving the tailplane; it's the fuselage flexing around its longitudinal axis. The aircraft is clearly designed to allow its parts to move in relation to each other - strength through flexibility, in other words.
Contrast that to the comments of a USAF C-5 Galaxy pilot that we read about here recently:
"The C-5 was designed in the 1960s and there are still some flying from the original production line. It was designed in the days when it was thought the best course of action for wings was to make them as stiff as possible."
There's more at the link.
I've noticed that difference myself, in other, smaller military transports of that vintage. Stiffness to prevent such flexing of the fuselage is - or, rather was - regarded as a handicap in an aircraft that might have to land on rough fields and unprepared surfaces. The flexing might become so great that parts would break - and getting such an aircraft out of a location like that with major damage might be a non-starter. Nowadays, almost all aircraft are built to 'flex' more than earlier models. Compare, for example, the current-production C-130J Super Hercules with the original version (I flew in the South African Air Force's C-130B's). You can watch the different behavior of the wings in video clips.