Jump to content

Patty's Bust


Recommended Posts

Guest Fister Crunchman

Maybe the 7-8' guy wanted too much money.

Yep. So Roger goes and offers a much shorter guy one thousand dollars for the ten minute job.

Even though he now has to fabricate a pair of really authentic breasts for the shorter guy to wear because he is short..

Breasts which Hieronimous never mentions in interviews, nor pointed out to his chums when he showed the suit at the tarvern.

But, a little bit of good luck. The shorter guy is willing to have his expensive glass eye fixed onto the suit to solve another possible problem.

Guys, this is fun, but bonkers. You are making me consider joining a UFO forum instead.

Fister

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

So the masterpiece suit/costume that is Patty has breast straps on the outside of the suit. That Patterson, he sure was an enigma! He fabricates a suit (from the cheesy Morris gorilla costume) that would make the largest, most well funded Hollywood studios jealous yet fastens Patty's water-filled bazonkas with straps on the outside the fabric of said masterpiece.

Roger, you mischievous scamp!

Roger was 'The Odd Couple'....in one neat, tidy package... :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't her hands move? Her wrists are rigid. Is this a brilliant stroke of film making genius? Did Patterson choose an old arthritic BF to make his hoax manageable or did Patty just get real sloppy in her dotage?

ch.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Romano:

You are adding the cibachrome frame that has the image anomaly giving a flase illusion of fingers.

Shouldn't be used for this type of comparison.

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Biggie

Btw what looks like fingers circling together in this frame is an artifact from a copy of the film that is not on the original footage. (Edit: I just now saw Bills post. We were posting at the same time while I was in the process of copying/saving/editing/posting the frame)

post-1874-053095900 1314652265_thumb.jpg

Edited by Biggie
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Patty does bend her wrist...in both directions...

Inwards...

Copy8FR352WalkAG7.gif

And outwards...

PattyCiba307FingerBendAG1.gif

Due to the forearm appearing to be only 'average-to-short' in length...(not 'longer than average')....it follows that there is no extension on Patty's lower-arms.

And if that is the case, that would mean that the bending of the fingers and wrist is occurring at actual skeletal joints. :)

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze
Copy8FR352WalkAG7.gif

I think this is a powerful demonstration for Patty having loose fitting suit arms. In this sequence what looks exactly like a floppy arm and glove can be seen. Special note should be given to the uniform bagginess extending down the length of the arm. Does Patty have seriously that amount of loose skin on her upper and lower arm yet somehow also has bulging calves, shoulders, etc? How can Patty be ripped and so floppy at the same time? Just look at the forearm. It looks like over all about 1/3 the width of the arm is just loose suit.

And outwards...

PattyCiba307FingerBendAG1.gif

If you could tell us why it can't be from contact with the thigh, it would be great for future reference in the subducting thigh line thread. Meanwhile, fingers can also cause finger bending...

i48185_bigneltana1.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

Does Patty have seriously that amount of loose skin on her upper and lower arm yet somehow also has bulging calves..

No, she has more body hair than a human, kit. That's a common Bigfoot characteristic in case you didn't get the memo. Do you really think that Patty's calf muscles don't 'bulge' (or rather, "flex") naturally??

C8F310F311CalfFlexCompAG1.gif

(gif from SweatyYeti)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a powerful demonstration for Patty having loose fitting suit arms. In this sequence what looks exactly like a floppy arm and glove can be seen. Special note should be given to the uniform bagginess extending down the length of the arm. Does Patty have seriously that amount of loose skin on her upper and lower arm yet somehow also has bulging calves, shoulders, etc? How can Patty be ripped and so floppy at the same time? Just look at the forearm. It looks like over all about 1/3 the width of the arm is just loose suit.

Longer forearm hair, common in some ape and monkey species.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

No, she has more body hair than a human, kit.

The notion that simply excess body hair is to account for the appearance of loose material along the length of Patty's arm is refuted easily by simply examining the armpit area. That's not hair. It can only be a loose suit or extremely loose sking and tissue. If the latter is tha case, Patty can not be extremely flabby while being also ripped at the same time.

Copy8FR352WalkAG7.gif

Do you really think that Patty's calf muscles don't 'bulge' (or rather, "flex") naturally??

Yes, I do. Patty looks very unnatural in many aspects to me. I think in either case, Patty exhibiting natural or unnatural things is not going to be a problem for you...

I don't doubt the paranormal aspect of Bigfoot; just as I don't doubt ghosts, aliens, 'extra dimensions', etc. etc. <I know, thats another story). There is way too much "high-strangeness" going on all over the place for it all to be fake.

That ^ brings up something that i've been wondering about. Who says they can't have a physical presence, at least sometimes and also possibly be super-natural, PN, highly strange or, whatever (at the same time)? And, how did whoever decided that, decide that?? ^_^

Why, if Patty exhibits anything particularly unnatural, you need only handily invoke the supernatural. No fuss no muss.

Edited by kitakaze
Link to post
Share on other sites

The notion that simply excess body hair is to account for the appearance of loose material along the length of Patty's arm is refuted easily by simply examining the armpit area. That's not hair. It can only be a loose suit or extremely loose sking and tissue. If the latter is tha case, Patty can not be extremely flabby while being also ripped at the same time.

What on earth does the forearm hair have to do with the armpit? :blink: I think it odd that Roger would have made a costume with varied length hair. Closely cropped hair on a costume is tricky enough. Give him some credit for that for gripes sake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Longer forearm hair, common in some ape and monkey species.

Nein. And it's the entire length of the arm. Check the armpit where the loose material connects. That can not be just hair...

101.jpg

It can only be a uniform loose flab down the arm or a loose suit.

776647deedd9ec604.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder why all the TV shows that investigated the PGF always used a man to simulate the walk and body movements seen in the film? Seems they have been ignoring the breast movements and position. Don't even need to make a Bigfoot suit to strap on some fake stuff to a human male and have him walk, swing towards the camera and back on exiting the frame. Then comparing this to a human female walking through with similar proportions. We might then be able to itemize the exact differences to look for between fake and real. I have seen men dressed in drag on TV before but they are exaggerating their persona on TV (usually comedy is involved) and the breast are just barely registered with the viewer.

What I see in the PGF when looking at the breasts is that with the downward step the right breast stops the lateral swing to stretch downwards also, but then bounces back upwards before the right foot even leaves the ground. In doing so, various areas of hair on them seem to act as if attached to a soft pliable covering (like skin) where the hair sheen changes as if what is under what it is attached to is changing it's 3D shape. On those sitcoms with men dressed as women, they don't seem to move at all or when they do, both move in the same direction, usually to the sides or upwards, never down. I can only take this to mean that moving down and bouncing back up puts undo stress on the attachment and the costume people opted for maintaining shape over movement so forgo any weight of substance. Saw one of these just the other night on some comedy host thingy and this is 2011, not 1967.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kit:

Big error. You should acknowledge the source of the diagram, and then include the text explanation that accompanied the diagram, which explains why those examples are not relevant to the PGF. Two of the three suit examples are made of something Morris never could use and Roger would not have been capable of fabricating himself. The green one is not surface material, it's under padding material, and utterly useless to try and cover with hair, unless you put furcloth over it, and then you lose that armpit curvature.

Bad example of cherry picking a diagram and ignoring the text accompanying the diagram, because the text refutes what you are trying to prove or claim.

Usually you are better than this.

Bill

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...