the Patterson Gimlin film: the only LEGIT Bigfoot film?

I think the P/G film is the ONLY legit film of Bigfoot ever taken. I respect the hell out of Dr. Meldrum, but I just can't take Paul Freeman's "Oh! There he goes!" footage seriously, as Meldrum DOES. I'm a staunch believer in Bigfoot, but I am skeptical about EVERY piece of footage EXCEPT the Patterson/Gimlin film. Your thoughts? Any films you believe ARE real footage? If so, can you provide links?

Pro; bigfootencounters.com/biology/nasi.htm
Con; bigfoot-lives.com/html/fahrenbach_s_analysis_of__the_.html

thanks!! i've seen most of the stuff pro/con on PG and I say i'd fall on the side of it being legit. your thoughts on Freeman, if you've seen it?

If the PG film is the gold standard by which all other are judged, it doesn't even make the cut.
Being that the Pixels are the size of it's head, who can say?

i wish someone could get hold of the original footage and make a digital/stabilised copy.

I tend to believe the Freeman Footage is the real deal and I admit that my reasoning is totally unscientific...I lost my dad 23 years ago and the first time I watched the Freeman Footage I felt like I was hearing my dad talking. He sounded just like him and when he says, Oh, there he goes! Well, it was exactly what my dad would have said. The breathing and everything (COPD) sounded just like him. That is the main reason it is believable to me. (I told you it was unscientific!)

Nothing wrong with that! Sorry about your dad.

I think the P/G film is the ONLY legit film of Bigfoot ever taken. I respect the hell out of Dr. Meldrum, but I just can't take Paul Freeman's "Oh! There he goes!" footage seriously, as Meldrum DOES. I'm a staunch believer in Bigfoot, but I am skeptical about EVERY piece of footage EXCEPT the Patterson/Gimlin film. Your thoughts? Any films you believe ARE real footage? If so, can you provide links? .

Meldrum hawks fake track casts at conferences. The PDf is fifty years old and has proven anything so how is it legitimate.

It's propped up by Bluff Creek locals to prop up businesss that depend on tourism to survive, thats all that is.

i wish someone could get hold of the original footage and make a digital/stabilised copy..

MK Davis but, but also thinks that there was a masscare which renders him without credibility.

What sold the PG footage for me as being real was after watching it many times I never noticed it having breasts until I watched a documentary about bigfoot and they had mentioned that in the show. There is no way that a hoaxer back in that day would have the ability to have a suit made to look that good and have the idea of putting breasts on it! No way! It's real!

I have been off and on with this film for years,and after years of debate I believe it's the real deal.

Now what does everyone think about the 2nd bigfoot that goes into the woods? I have heard that there is a baby in the film as well, but I never could find that one.

Samsquanch wrote:I have been off and on with this film for years,and after years of debate I believe it's the real deal.

Now what does everyone think about the 2nd bigfoot that goes into the woods? I have heard that there is a baby in the film as well, but I never could find that one.

I don't see it, dude. Davis comes off as a kook with that stuff, IMO

I dont think so, but the thing about the PGF is there is no way they were clever enough to come up with the breasts that obey physics so perfectly. There is just no way. I think the idea they killed those bigfeet after that scene is more plausible than PFD being faked. And I dont think that happened either.

BurdenOfProof wrote:The problem is people want this to be real so bad that with blind faith they proclaim it to be real. As this is the only decent attempt at a hoax video it is the only thing they have to hold on to.

The breasts issue is ridiculous. Patterson depicted a female bigfoot with breasts in his book which came out BEFORE the pgf was shot. If you still say the pgf is real after knowing that one simple fact then you are insane.

Dude, DRAWING something is a helluva lot easier than MAKING A COSTUME, especially with what was available in terms of materials in 1967. The breasts of the creature were to me final bit that makes this REAL

I like the PG film. Also like the Freeman footage and Hoffman. Off the top of my head those are my favourites, only ones that made me go 'hmmmm'...

I remember really liking the Minnesota farmer's field footage but last time I watched that I was less enthused.

Not real.

mark_boy wrote:Not real.

Okay. Why not, in your opinion?

I AM THE BLOBSQUATCH wrote:

mark_boy wrote:Not real.

Okay. Why not, in your opinion?

I think Patterson had the motive, opportunity and ability to pull off a hoax.

Patterson was in need of money and even tried to pay for the camera used in the film with a bad cheque.
Patterson drew a female bigfoot with breasts like Patty before the filming and there were multiple reports of bigfoot in the area before the film
Patterson was a top notch craftsman

Also, even though this my own conjecture, I think the 'costume' isn't half as convincing as some people make out.

Check out this video from Voodoosixxx, it really cast doubt in my eye for the P/G film.

https://youtu.be/drgWnSpm3Tc

I heard Bo Bo recently state that there is more Freeman footage that wasn't released due to the fact that Freeman was in poor health and looked awful in the video.It's supposedly much clearer than the previous vid,but he got frightened and urinated on himself.Anyone else heard of this and who would have said video...?

Munns has implied that there is an original film reel and previously lost footage that might be released.

We will just have to wait and see.

I've seen good arguments for and against the footage, so I'm firmly on the fence.

Both sides present good arguments for either a legitimate film or a hoaxed one. For years and years I thought this was legitimate, then I started to question my judgement and watched the PGF over and over for hours, looking at everything. Depending on which version I saw, I would pick out different anomalies. I started to lean in favour of a hoax, but now I honestly don't know.
This is film is heavily defended by proponents of Bigfoot so I treat this film with extreme caution even though I am a proponent of Bigfoot as well.
Early last year I watched a breakdown done by Tom at TheCryptoCrew and it just adds more mystery to the film. Tom is quite objective in his breakdowns and he's not so quick to call Sasquatch on everything.
Here is Tom's breakdown for those who have not seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M0mlUykA_Q

Saying 'just watch the film' is the same as saying 'prove it's wrong'.....both positions ignore the scientific method.

There is video analysis that suggests hoaxing and equallly legitimate analysis that suggests otherwise.

Consequently I'd forget about it and wait for something more conclusive.

BurdenOfProof wrote:The easiest way to decide whether the film is fake or not is to actually just watch the film. The suit is laughably bad, the walk replicates that of a guy in suit, the static diaper butt is so ridiculous that to claim that looks natural you are truelly deluded.Let's all just ignore the fabric on the thigh subducting under the hip.

The default position as described by science is that it is a man in a suit. End of f****** discussion.

Dude, really? End of discussion because you say so? Lol. Really qualified people on BOTH sides of the debate have made their case, but I guess we can stop talking about it now because YOU said so. LMAO. I happen to think its LEGIT, but hey, I could be wrong. But you just KNOW it's fake due to static diaper butt and "fabric". Another triumph of the Scientific Method! Can we just agree that the EXPERTS on each side make interesting points until someone comes forward with the costume?

Woodwose wrote:Saying 'just watch the film' is the same as saying 'prove it's wrong'.....both positions ignore the scientific method.

There is video analysis that suggests hoaxing and equallly legitimate analysis that suggests otherwise.

Consequently I'd forget about it and wait for something more conclusive.

Great points!