VividSimon
Simply Perfect
Console
best movie i've ever seen.
Tymon Sutton
The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.
oldsloughstalker
For almost 50 years, the debate on whether or not that this vintage film is genuine footage of a real animal is still alive and well. Hopefully, this submission will shed some light to the novice on this subject, as well as some of the skeptics. As an experienced outdoorsman, my honest opinion is that the footage shows a living animal. I will not bias anyone's opinion by stating any of my many reasons for this conclusion. However; for those who may think otherwise, such as that this may simply be a hoax, or footage of a man in a mask and costume ... let's try a little experiment.First of all, please watch the footage and pay close attention to the subject in the film, especially its head. Please notice that as the subject walks away from Roger Patterson through the creek-bed as it is being filmed (which is very rugged terrain, I might add) that not once does it ever look down. Now for the experiment, which I have tried several times with the general public at outdoor wildlife expos: I have asked participants to put on an over-the-head gorilla mask and then briskly walk away from me until I instruct them to stop. I generally let the participant travel between 10-15 yards away before stopping them, and then immediately turn to my audience of "witnesses" and ask them, "How many times did the subject look down?" The answer averages 3 to 5 times by audience response for each time that I have tried this experiment.So now, my question to you the reader is ... how can a man in a mask and bulky costume possibly traverse that rocky and uneven of terrain without either looking down or tripping? It was hard enough for Roger Patterson to pursue the animal while filming, all the while trying to keep focused on the subject as well as focusing on where he himself was going. For a novice photographer with an unfamiliar rented camera, I feel that Roger did a fairly good job of filming considering the circumstances. Thank you for your time and interest in this film, and I hope that this review will help you to form your own opinion on its authenticity.
William Biodrowski
Probably the most iconic "hoax" of our generation, the Patterson/Gimlin Bigfoot film shot in Bluff Creek California in 1967 still finds itself at the top of the list after nearly fifty years despite attempts to debunk or defame it.The reason for this failure in my opinion is in the films realistic nature, if it's a hoax it's a damn good one. The film is grainy and shaky yet detail can be seen that you wouldn't expect to see in a cheap costume.I've studied this film extensively for a long time, the only thing that prevents me from concluding it's legitimate is the extraordinary, unprecedented nature of it, Bigfoot cannot exist, therefore this film must be a hoax, I think.
xWickedHeartx
Okay, I have heard the myth that Patterson gave a death bed confession. This is a common misconception. The actual person that did this was the man who took the picture of 'Nessie,' which has, since then, become canonical. Patterson swore to his dying day that the footage was REAL. Gimlin was the one who disputed this fact, but only after Patterson died. He claimed he was in the suit, and came out to the public because Patterson did not give him the money promised for the hoax. How exactly this is possible is beyond me, considering he was with Patterson during filming...Also, scientists and cryptozoologists alike have disputed the fact that muscles are CLEARLY VISIBLE! In the section where the creature turns back to look over her shoulder, you notice that her chest, arm, pectoral, and leg muscles are shifting, along with glute muscles. This is impossible in costumes back then, even costumes made by the man who designed those for Planet of the Apes, as has been alleged. This lends credence to the thought that the creature must be real.Despite thoughts that it is all a hoax, I disagree. You can define muscles, and close-ups of the face are convincing. It may not be a Sasquatch, but, it was a living creature.Anyone who denies this should check their facts before posting nonsense.
prizm632
No one has ever proved this film to be a fake. There were no deathbed confessions and the recent reports that a famous Hollywood make-up pro had created and worn a monkey suit were revealed to be false.If it was some guy in a suit, Bob should have shot the idiot and settled it one way or another.The film stands as a litmus test. If you would like to believe there are apes in North America, it is compelling evidence. If you tend to reject such notions, you see a guy in a gorilla suit.Personally I like the idea that we have not quite figured everything out yet. Unfortunately, the true skeptics will never believe it until some hunter does indeed shoot one and we have it on a slab.
