• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
My friend Alan Friswell is a special effects guy (he worked with the late great Ray Harryhausen) and he thinks the subject of the PG film is not a human in a suit.
 
I've seen this film:

...and I think the subject of the PG film is a man in a suit.
 
My friend Alan Friswell is a special effects guy (he worked with the late great Ray Harryhausen) and he thinks the subject of the PG film is not a human in a suit.
And I’d like to hear the reasons why. ‘Thinks’ is not quite good enough as evidence.
 
Whilst that is a totally cool bit of film with the superimposition, the rest of that website seems to go further (like about a million miles further) than anyone on this forum would advocate for. I present to you: the hair braid
There are many, many analyses of the film out there that see things nobody else can. Pareidolia runs rampant. However, the hair braid thing is very interesting: it's a motif seen world-wide, usually in connection with horse's manes being braided. In European folklore it was ascribed to the fae (or occasionally wildmen), but in the Caucasus, Asia and North America it's seen as a hominid behaviour. Not saying there's a braid n the film for one moment, but it's a fascinatingly specific detail.
 
And I’d like to hear the reasons why. ‘Thinks’ is not quite good enough as evidence.
Go on, I'd like to hear what you think about the knee/calf in the film clip. My final request I promise. You can explain it away, I won't argue, but I just thought it was a detail that was harder to fit into your preferred suit theory.

(Also, Stu - yes the fairies do knot up horse's manes! Nice observation)
 
Go on, I'd like to hear what you think about the knee/calf in the film clip. My final request I promise. You can explain it away, I won't argue, but I just thought it was a detail that was harder to fit into your preferred suit theory.

(Also, Stu - yes the fairies do knot up horse's manes! Nice observation)
Sorry to butt in but why would a real leg jar like that? It looks like terrible biomechanics.
 
Good point well made. I was looking at gait analysis videos on youtube for a similar view. But I can't find one that depicts a heavily built person (they're generally skinny athletes without the apparent bulk of the figure in the PGF). Could that make a difference?
eg
 
Whilst I appreciate it can't be a real anomalous creature because... & therefore it's a man in a suit, even though the suit would seem to be superior to anything existing at the time & obtained by a man with no budget to speak of, what do you make of the various analyses of body proportions etc which claim these are wrong for a human re shoulder/elbow/hip/knee/ankle ratios etc?
 
Good point well made. I was looking at gait analysis videos on youtube for a similar view. But I can't find one that depicts a heavily built person (they're generally skinny athletes without the apparent bulk of the figure in the PGF). Could that make a difference?
eg
I am not sure but I am also not sure if that is the right question to be asking. Humans only get that sort of bulk from being sedentary and taking in too many calories. A wild animal doesn't get like that. I had a look at the first minute of a video of gorillas messing about. While not bipedal they certainly have bulk but are still very graceful, even when up on two legs.


I am in two minds about Patty myself but the more I think about it, the less I can imagine such a clumpy and graceless creature surviving in the wilderness.
 
I am not sure but I am also not sure if that is the right question to be asking. Humans only get that sort of bulk from being sedentary and taking in too many calories. A wild animal doesn't get like that. I had a look at the first minute of a video of gorillas messing about. While not bipedal they certainly have bulk but are still very graceful, even when up on two legs.


I am in two minds about Patty myself but the more I think about it, the less I can imagine such a clumpy and graceless creature surviving in the wilderness.
Love gorillas, awesome bit of footage.
Whilst Patty is not as smooth as a gorilla etc I think clumpy and graceless is perhaps a bit harsh?
 
When Bigfoot turns and looks in the direction of the camera and shifts its weight, you can see the biceps femoris tense up and become prominent on the surface of the side of the leg, as weight is shifted and the leg is lifted slightly as the creature turns. The biceps femoris is anchored to the head of the fibula --so it is attached to skeletal structure. It is very hard to imagine a suit simulating that kind of naturalism and skeletal engineering. The breasts are quite believable too.

Leg.png

Link for above.


figure_1-17A-400x713.jpg
 
Love gorillas, awesome bit of footage.
Whilst Patty is not as smooth as a gorilla etc I think clumpy and graceless is perhaps a bit harsh?
Sorry, just looked at the footage again and I don't think it is too harsh!


When Bigfoot turns and looks in the direction of the camera and shifts its weight, you can see the biceps femoris tense up and become prominent on the surface of the side of the leg, as weight is shifted and the leg is lifted slightly as the creature turns. The biceps femoris is anchored to the head of the fibula --so it is attached to skeletal structure. It is very hard to imagine a suit simulating that kind of naturalism and skeletal engineering. The breasts are quite believable too.
They look completely solid and don't move at all. Nothing natural about that.
 
Hmm.. I see. So you aren't noticing the muscle (circled in red) that has becomes prominent at that point:
I meant - as weird as it feels to mention it - Patty's breasts.

The "muscle" Well maybe. Could also be the leg of the suit creasing up as the wearer lifts it.
 
If you take a look at the footage of the figure from the back and the rest of the footage too, it is apparent that the figure has very wide shoulders in relation to head. And the shoulders are articulated with the clavicles ("shoulder girdle" in figure drawing) and the acromion processes of the scapulae. The arms come our where they should and are properly articulated --there is no stuffing or suit seen, imo.
https://www.google.com/search?q=acr...XMs54KHcghApsQ_AUoAnoECA0QBA&biw=1163&bih=554
Same thing with the hips / pelvis too...
To me it appears to be real --from an anatomical perspective. But it shouldn't be there.
 
Good lord, did I just click on it? :buck: I am not sure I am ready to do a Youtube search yet!


I've got some and they definitely move about when walking. I don't know about gorillas. (Still not ready to find out..)
Good lord that would be a slippery slope to gorilla porn... Is nothing holy??! Did I just think about buying a gorilla suit and.. Perish the thought! o_O
 
Go on, I'd like to hear what you think about the knee/calf in the film clip. My final request I promise. You can explain it away, I won't argue, but I just thought it was a detail that was harder to fit into your preferred suit theory.

(Also, Stu - yes the fairies do knot up horse's manes! Nice observation)

You’ve asked a few questions now. I”m sure you’ve probably already ascertained my opinion of the film. While the judder is interesting, what is equally interesting are the shoe-like soles of the feet and what looks like a costume join at the middle. But I don't want to go over old trampled ground. I’m sure this has been looked at and discussed earlier in the thread. A bulked-out costume can judder too.
 
You’ve asked a few questions now. I”m sure you’ve probably already ascertained my opinion of the film. While the judder is interesting, what is equally interesting are the shoe-like soles of the feet and what looks like a costume join at the middle. But I don't want to go over old trampled ground. I’m sure this has been looked at and discussed earlier in the thread. A bulked-out costume can judder too.
Those are still good points about the feet and hair pattern. I will say that the walk seems a bit staged, and kind of awkward; that's why I was surprised to read that Gimlin thought the creature wanted to show herself to them... Interesting.
 
Okay, now I'm gonna lay down some gorilla porn on you. Gmilkystreams. For your education of course. Totally relevant to the topic. According to Cleo Magazine, women will become aroused and men will become highly un-aroused from these images. You can determine for yourself if this means that the FBI SVU needs to investigate Cleo. IDK how people can sexualize this myself, but then my low opinion on furries on on record. They will go some way to improving your understanding of what the mammary glands of Gorillas are like.
GT1.jpg
GT2.jpg
GT3.jpg
GT4.jpg
GT5.jpg
 
Okay, now I'm gonna lay down some gorilla porn on you. Gmilkystreams. For your education of course. Totally relevant to the topic. According to Cleo Magazine, women will become aroused and men will become highly un-aroused from these images. You can determine for yourself if this means that the FBI SVU needs to investigate Cleo.
Not sure about the FBI but I think some sort of therapy might be useful/compulsory.
 
And I’d like to hear the reasons why. ‘Thinks’ is not quite good enough as evidence.
You thinking it's a man in a monkey suit is not good enough evidence to dismiss it either. Alan thinks that nobody of that period could have made a suit that good. John Chambers of Planet of the Apes fame said it was beyond him as did Disney studios. He thinks nobody could do practical effects that good today.
 
Regarding the white soles, I don't think that many shoes apart from trainers have white soles. Even then, this doesn't seem like the environment where shoe soles would stay white for long.
 
Back
Top