Jump to content
kitakaze

Would A Good Recreation Of Patty Affect Your Belief In The Pgf?

Would a Good Recreation of Patty affect your belief in the PGF?   

43 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

kitakaze

Kit:

Are you implying **** Smith endorsed Blevin's effort?

If so, got a source.

Bill

No, Bill. Think what you asked for. You wrote...

"We often hear the names of established and respected Hollywood makeup artists who say the PGF is a fake. Blevins' effort would be far more credible as "pretty close" if perhaps one or several of those respected makeup artists would care to endorse Blevins effort and give their expert opinion that it was "pretty close". I, for one, would be fascinated to see if any of those artists would so endorse Blevins effort."

What I gave you was a name and a contact link - the path for your fingers to do the walking. Smith is a respected, highly accomplished, and lauded FX artist who looks at the PGF and sees a hoax. You want to know if such a person would endorse Blevins. There you go. There's his website and his contact. Are you really fascinated to see what he would think of what Blevins did? Now everything is so much simpler - you ask him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Kit:

I've been in contact with both Smith's son, David, who now manages his training program, and with Jill Rockow, who assists Smith in his daily care at the nursing home where he now resides. Sadly, because of dimentia, he has no recollection of his career or anything about makeup. His memory loss occurred long before Blevins arrived on the scene. That doesn't diminish the fact that he was truly one of the greatest makeup artists the profession ever saw, but the operative word here is "was", not "is". He is no longer capable of rendering an opinion on the issue.

But you are obsiously missing the point. It is the task of those who think Blevins did a "good job" who shound seek out an endorsement from the makeup artists you so love to quote. If you and your friends love that crappy suit,, and you love those other makeup artist opinions, it's you who should see if you can get the guys you love to endorse the suit recreation you love. My bet is you don't want to seek out those endorsements because you secretly know the other makeup artists will likely tear Blevins work apart with ferocious intensity.

It's a joke, and that's being kind to Blevins.

You see,if you are ever going to get your "proof of a hoax" into one coherent and final proof, you have to pull all these elements together in your formal proof. That's what I've been saying for years now. You can't pull all the elements together into one coherent and final proof. Sooner of later, you're going to have to pull it together, or you'll just fade away as a person who once made a lot of noise.

Anyways, thanks for clearing up that you don't know any professional makeup artist who will endorse Blevins' work as "good".

Bill

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Good points, Bill. :)

Bill wrote:

My bet is you don't want to seek out those endorsements because you secretly know the other makeup artists will likely tear Blevins work apart with ferocious intensity.

Or...they may tear the 'Blevins Beast' apart with ferocious laughter... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Wookie73

I didn't know that about **** Smith..... :( that makes me sad. he was an icon ....

Edited by Wookie73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

There are some aspects of the hoax theory that are plausible enough for someone to conclude it's a hoax, I could understand that. However, every time I look at Patty walking across the screen and study the details I just hit the same wall- how was that possibly done? How could that have possibly been done back in the 60's, and by a cowboy in Yakima? Even the professional work back then just doesn't come close in realism.

Some people see something that looks poor and an obvious costume- I just don't see that. I've never seen a costume done with details that make it come alive. Some costumes just look cheap and artificial all around. The newer professional costumes done for movies and TV are too refined- the muscles, fur, etc., are so refined that the final product just doesn't look real. Real things aren't perfect. I think that's what sets Patty apart from everything that I've seen- if Patty is really a costume then it's the perfect balance of good and bad. On top of that you add a gait that you never see anyone in a costume get right and look as natural.

When you say "good recreation" then you're talking about something done on a really unique level. I see the skeptics bashing their heads saying "How could you possibly not see the hoax?" Here's why- because a theory just isn't good enough for me. My brain says it's plausible but my eyes say no way. I need to see something that rivals Patty on a physical level, and matching the level of realism.

Edited by roguefooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

The industry people generally perfer to focus on the many anazing accomplishments of his career, and I share their unbridled admiration for what an amazing guy D. Smith was. I knew him personally,, not well, but he once came to my home and we had a nice one-on-one for a few hours, and it was one of the most fascinating times of my career.

Anyways, he is no longer able to offer an opinion on the PGF or Blevins work, or anything as such. But his career and his incredible openness to other artists, and the fact that when he retired, and his mind was still sharp, he wrote out the sum of his career knowledge in the trainig course his son now administers, and it is without doubt the finest source of training any aspiring makeup artist could have. Offhand, I can't think of any other makeup artist who literally put his whole career's worth of knowledge and techniques together as a formal package for the generations of artists to come. So his incredible knowledge will always be with us, and will never be lost.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest gershake

Poll options not sufficient. Undecided about the PGF (currently... 65 % proponent or so :)), good recreation would lower that percentage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Kit:

I've been in contact with both Smith's son, David, who now manages his training program, and with Jill Rockow, who assists Smith in his daily care at the nursing home where he now resides. Sadly, because of dimentia, he has no recollection of his career or anything about makeup. His memory loss occurred long before Blevins arrived on the scene. That doesn't diminish the fact that he was truly one of the greatest makeup artists the profession ever saw, but the operative word here is "was", not "is". He is no longer capable of rendering an opinion on the issue.

That's very sad. Smith did not have dementia here (38:36)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTL7sR2E8p4

But you are obsiously missing the point. It is the task of those who think Blevins did a "good job" who shound seek out an endorsement from the makeup artists you so love to quote. If you and your friends love that crappy suit,, and you love those other makeup artist opinions, it's you who should see if you can get the guys you love to endorse the suit recreation you love. My bet is you don't want to seek out those endorsements because you secretly know the other makeup artists will likely tear Blevins work apart with ferocious intensity.

It's a joke, and that's being kind to Blevins.

Well, Bill, the task was on your mind, so I provided you with information in an effort to get your answer that you were looking for. If it was my task to do so, it was not one that was on my mind, as I have far more important tasks of the face-melting sort to deal with now. If an FX guy who thinks the PGF is a hoax based on looking at the film mocked Blevins effort, it wouldn't bother me at all. Why don't you understand that? That's strange. If the best FX people think Patty looks like an obvious suit, I expect them to think Blevins' suit looks even more so. It looks like a suit that a guy with no experience made. What is very interesting to me about it is that he was able to match Patty's dimensions and proportions.

Do you bet that I don't want to find out for myself. Excellent. You have a tendency to not have a clue what you're talking about. Social media is fun and convenient. This is a copypaste of the message I just sent John Vulich on my friends list on Facebook the moment I read your quote above...

Hey, John. Quick question - A guy I know in Kentucky spent three days and $242 dollars trying to recreate Patty from the PGF. Can you have a look and tell me what you would grade the effort from an FX artist point of view? He has no experience in suit making whatsoever, but I think he did a pretty good job in matching the dimensions and proportions of Patty.

Bigblevins1.jpg

Bigblevins.jpg

Here's a close-up look...

Have a good one and thanks, man.

KK

I'll let you know when he gets back to me.

You see,if you are ever going to get your "proof of a hoax" into one coherent and final proof, you have to pull all these elements together in your formal proof. That's what I've been saying for years now. You can't pull all the elements together into one coherent and final proof. Sooner of later, you're going to have to pull it together, or you'll just fade away as a person who once made a lot of noise.

Anyways, thanks for clearing up that you don't know any professional makeup artist who will endorse Blevins' work as "good".

Bill

I'll settle for the suit and confessions and explanation from the source and you can come to me and see how I feel about letting you have access to it. Following the source works and those who stick to the film can go right ahead and continue doing so.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crowlogic

Blevins head is still bigger than Patty's. I don't think you can stick a human head in Patty. Morris couldn't and Blevins either got it wrong or couldn't make it happen at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Kit:

As I've said many a time, good luck doing your thing, and I'll do mine.

Time will tell who's on the right track and what the real truth of the film is.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

kitakaze. I like your poll. Thanks for sharing. I voted for No, a recreation, while interesting, doesn't mean anything and I would not stop believing her to be a real Bigfoot. I based it on my own personal research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

I'll settle for the suit and confessions and explanation from the source and you can come to me and see how I feel about letting you have access to it. Following the source works and those who stick to the film can go right ahead and continue doing so.

Let me know how close I am-

You said that a family member of Ron Olson had proof, then you argued that the stompers used in Olson's Sasquatch movie were from Patterson (which they didn't match). Now you're claiming a suit from said source.

Are you sure someone isn't just taking you for a lot of money? The cheesy suit used in Olson's sasquatch movie?

Edited by roguefooter
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

We often hear the names of established and respected Hollywood makeup artists who say the PGF is a fake. Blevins' effort would be far more credible as "pretty close" if perhaps one or several of those respected makeup artists would care to endorse Blevins effort and give their expert opinion that it was "pretty close". I, for one, would be fascinated to see if any of those artists would so endorse Blevins effort.

Bill

But you are obsiously missing the point. It is the task of those who think Blevins did a "good job" who shound seek out an endorsement from the makeup artists you so love to quote. If you and your friends love that crappy suit,, and you love those other makeup artist opinions, it's you who should see if you can get the guys you love to endorse the suit recreation you love. My bet is you don't want to seek out those endorsements because you secretly know the other makeup artists will likely tear Blevins work apart with ferocious intensity.

It's a joke, and that's being kind to Blevins.

(snip)

Anyways, thanks for clearing up that you don't know any professional makeup artist who will endorse Blevins' work as "good".

Bill

Do you bet that I don't want to find out for myself. Excellent. You have a tendency to not have a clue what you're talking about. Social media is fun and convenient. This is a copypaste of the message I just sent John Vulich on my friends list on Facebook the moment I read your quote above...

(snip)

I'll let you know when he gets back to me.

Kit:

As I've said many a time, good luck doing your thing, and I'll do mine.

Time will tell who's on the right track and what the real truth of the film is.

Bill

Not only is social media fun and convenient. It's also crazy fast. You pontificate, I do. here is Optic Nerve Studi creator and FX artist John Vulich's professional opinion on Blevins' amateur effort...

VULICH.jpg

"It's a little "clunkier" looking than the Patterson suit but not really magnitudes worse in quality. I'd say he's about 2/3rds there." - John Vulich, owner/creator of Optice Nerve Studios and Emmy award-winning FX artist.

Bill, you did some FX for Return of the Living Dead. Cool. John was the SFX supervisor for this movie...

1274099167_kinopoisk.ru-night-of-the-living-dead-367372.jpg

Bill, I know you to be a man of your word. You said...

"Blevins' effort would be far more credible as "pretty close" if perhaps one or several of those respected makeup artists would care to endorse Blevins effort and give their expert opinion that it was "pretty close"."

Therefore, I know that you weren't just letting loose baseless pontification and you now consider Blevins' amateur effort to be far more credible, yes?

You thought about it. I did it. You asked. I delivered. Careful what you wish for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

kitakaze,

The Belvins video still looks incredibly unlike what we see in the P/G film. Why not show a zoomed in version to show just how it looks. My opinion, it just gets worse the better the look you get. Just my opinion, not even slightly close.

You sayin' Bill has a tendancy to not have a clue what he's talkin' bout, I'd disagree with that as well. On the matter of a recreation attempt, I'd take Bill's opinions in a flat second over yours, it's what he did/does. As for him havin' a tendancy to not have a clue what he's talkin' bout in general, I'd say it's the complete opposite.

The suit an confessions an explanations from the source, huh, think about lettin' Bill have access to it...nother huh ! :derisive:

Didn't you say somethin' similar a long ways back ?

Pat...

ps; What did you show Mr. Vulich's for comparison ? If it's what you just presented here, does little for the credibility or quality of his opinion. If he was able to come to a conclusion based on the above, this quickly, sorry to say, suggests to me at least, an opinion of little value, to me.

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Let me know how close I am-

About this much...

solarneighborhood_recons_big.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...