We have had film footage of a sasquatch for over 55 years now. In addition, human technology has gotten more and more incredible every year. If the resources used to kill people overseas over the past 25 years were used to catch a sasquatch, it would be successful in short order.
Because subsequent films were simply not shot under as ideal conditions, and still photos are simply not going to overcome the denial the phenomenon suffers from.
Yes, one would think that more films of equal or better wuality dhould have surfaced by now, but I'm really not surprised that they haven't. For example, I see bears very regularly......on average, more than one per year. Guess how many pics and films I have of bears? How many bear footprint casts? None. Not one. I'm not running sround with a camera. Even though I have a dash cam in my dsaily driver, I still don't have one in my truck/camper.
Early last spring I saw a fat black hear trying to crawl under the moose fence near the main gate of Ft. Richardson as I drove by, where I've seen bears a few times before. It was off to the side and not in view of my dash cam.
I have game cam pics of bear eyeballs as they sniffed my game cam at a bear bait station. If I said it was a sasquatch, only fools would believe me. When I say it's a bear, everybody agrees, even though you really can't tell what it is. That's just how it works. Photos really are meaningless, unless you're going to use the photos as the lead up for a capture/kill operation, but that brings with it a whole new level of problems.