• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot Film

Ogdred Weary said:
CFZ interview MK Davis who says he has an additional film and additional stills from the original Bluff Creek film. Allegedly, they were there hunting Bigfoot with a dog, and had already killed one. There's supposedly a bloody pool (there's some sort of pool and there seems to be something black in it - doesn't look very red to me) which had the remains, including pelt of a previously killed animal, which they were using to train the dog to recognise the smell. Intriging, not sure that I'm convinced.

Part two yet to be uploaded/aired.

Click to expand...
I'm not convinced myself on this one.
 
madmath said:
Actually, the latest estimates put her about 6' 3" or so.
Click to expand...
If that matches the height of Bob Heironymous, who claimed that it was him in the Bigfoot suit, the case for a real-life cryptid would be somewhat diminished.
 
Bob Gimlin speaks about what they saw at Bluff Creek and how they filmed Bigfoot.
Interesting comments with the video, others have had their own Bigfoot sightings and believe him totally:

 
I caught a bit of a ‘Finding Bigfoot’ on tv today [I know, I know]. Someone has done some sort of laser scan of Bluff Creek in an effort to find how tall Patty was. Their figure is 6’ 3” 'with a high degree of accuracy'. Not as tall as some have estimated.
 
That was about the height of Bob Hieronimus, wasn't it? Pure coincidence, I am sure. :roll:

(Then again, "Finding Bigfoot", right?)
 
stu neville said:
Actually no - Heironymous is about 6'7" (depending on whom you ask) so ironically too tall to be Patty.

Which is quite amusing :) .
Click to expand...
I honestly thought an adult Bigfoot was supposed to be 7ft or more tall.
Are females meant to be substantially shorter?
 
No. But Patty is an adult. (I wont explain why, go ask your mother...)

What I heard is that juveniles are more gracile, human built, even.
 
Not necessarily. I know what you're saying, but Ostman and Roe both described a six foot, large breasted female, and in the former case there was a whole family so comparison could be made - the mother was 7+ feet, so Ostman concluded the 6 ft one was an adolescent.
 
As the trees and other vegetation at the Bluff Creek location will have changed a fair bit since 1967, are there enough visual clues to calculate the height of the walking figure/creature so precisely?
 
stu neville said:
Actually no - Heironymous is about 6'7" (depending on whom you ask) so ironically too tall to be Patty.

Which is quite amusing :) .
Click to expand...
That is amusing indeed, though I couldn't find any reliable information on his size. Nor are there any statistics on the average height of female Bigfoot. It all remains speculation.
 
Kingsize Wombat said:
That is amusing indeed, though I couldn't find any reliable information on his size.
Click to expand...
In fairness, by most accounts anything Bob himself said had to be taken with a kilo of salt. Unsure if anybody independently verified his stature.

Kingsize Wombat said:
Nor are there any statistics on the average height of female Bigfoot. It all remains speculation.
Click to expand...
The point does stand, though, that anything seven or eight feet tall would have been six (and five, and four) feet tall at some point earlier in their life.
 
Some apes there is a lot of difference between males and females.

Some there is not.
 
I've just found a site that's claiming to be selling re casts of the Patterson/Gimlin original foot casts. I haven't looked into if these are genuine reproductions or not yet ..

https://bigfootcasts.com/en-ca
 
Analogue Boy said:
Have a guess.
Click to expand...
Absolutely 100% stone cold the real deal that also probably contain genuine sasquatch hairs that were somehow overlooked at the time but then were accidently transferred to these once in a life time opportunities providing proof at last that this species exists. What's your guess?.
 
I’d like to see the ape record of North America. Anyway. I’ve said here before it’s a man in a suit. In fact you can see the join at the waist in Lord Mongrove’s link above. That’s variations of the nap of different materials of the costume.
 
Analogue Boy said:
I’d like to see the ape record of North America. Anyway. I’ve said here before it’s a man in a suit. In fact you can see the join at the waist in Lord Mongrove’s link above. That’s variations of the nap of different materials of the costume.
Click to expand...
The only problem with the most obvious answer which would be "It's a man in a suit" is that there just wasn't anybody good enough back then to do that. Not even the best who was John Chambers. American Werewolf in London's Rick Baker might have been able to duplicate the patty footage at the absolute peak of his hair suit work which would have been Tarzan - The Legend of Greystoke in around 1984 .. I'd turn the music down for this but it demonstrates who good Baker was in that year .. all of these apes are fake costumed actors or puppets. ..


The first time I learned about body/mass muscle structure being faked for a film was from around the same time with Marc Shostrum's crew including the now more famous than him KNB F/X working for him. They sewed bags of ball bearings under a foam latex body suit that was about the same size as how we view patty in that late 60's footage. They did that do create an obesity look with the bottom and breasts of the character wobbling for Evil Dead 2. Tiny details.

Facially, make up artists were able to create something as convincing as patty's face since the 1930's.

'Tying' all of that together though, on location with a cheap camera in a remote forest in '69 with a presumably a low budget would have been extremely difficult to practically achieve. If it is a man in a suit, I'd argue it's more likely to be a woman in a suit if it was faked. Because of the more nimble way it moves over the rough terrain. It would also be more likely to not be a single suit but compartments of a suit as well as a separate facial make up. Or it's the real deal. If it's fake, it was very advanced for 1969.
 
Not wishing to retread old ground with my size 29 boots,
Patterson was working on a bigfoot movie. He drew artwork of a female Bigfoot before he ever took a trip out to the woods with a camera in his hand.

CE074C8E-5F3E-473D-B951-D4370E13F1BE.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top