Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Are We Able To Recreate Pgf Today?

Recommended Posts

Guest

Kit has all but admitted Patty's arms are longer than Bob's so he is committed to arm extensions, which Bob never mentioned.

That's quite a turnaround. Doesn't it assure that his documentary will be DOA? I hope he hasn't spent the big bucks on it yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

the image of guy in suit is much closer to camera than the P/G subject.

Either that or BH in the suit is much bigger than Patty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Even if I was the biggest PGF skeptic in the world, I would have to admit that proving that Patty could be recreated doesn't prove she was created.

As I mentioned in some other post somewhere - If I created a perfect bear suit and filmed it to be indistinguishable from an actual bear, it would not prove that bears don't exist. Furthermore, it would not immediately throw into question every film of a bear, let alone any one film of a bear that we were examining.

It would be a lot of trouble, time and money to put in to a project, just so that I can prove that I can build a bear suit.

Every time I read or hear the debate over whether Patty can be recreated (from materials available at the time, of course!), that is all I can think about. It doesn't really matter as far as proving anything about Patty.

"Could that bear in the film be recreated? Yes? Well then, you must then be forced to admit that you doubt the reality of THAT bear in the film". How is that a win? How does that further research into this film? The premise is flawed.

Are PGF skeptics trying to do away with what they consider the ONLY reason that they think some people consider it real? That the suit could not have been created? That once they recreate Patty, we can put the film behind us and move on? The exercise will be virtually meaningless, in my opinion.

That the suit could not be recreated is not the only reason that people consider the film genuine.

Edited by Harry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

Even if I was the biggest PGF skeptic in the world, I would have to admit that proving that Patty could be recreated doesn't prove she was created.

Correct. But, especially after repeated attempts some 40+ years after the fact, the failure to do so increasingly bolsters skepticism of the claim that Patterson hoaxed what we see in the film.

Of course, that proves nothing more than the unwillingness of denialists to support a long overdue official inquiry into the phenomenon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Even if I was the biggest PGF skeptic in the world, I would have to admit that proving that Patty could be recreated doesn't prove she was created.

As I mentioned in some other post somewhere - If I created a perfect bear suit and filmed it to be indistinguishable from an actual bear, it would not prove that bears don't exist. Furthermore, it would not immediately throw into question every film of a bear, let alone any one film of a bear that we were examining.

It would be a lot of trouble, time and money to put in to a project, just so that I can prove that I can build a bear suit.

Every time I read or hear the debate over whether Patty can be recreated (from materials available at the time, of course!), that is all I can think about. It doesn't really matter as far as proving anything about Patty.

"Could that bear in the film be recreated? Yes? Well then, you must then be forced to admit that you doubt the reality of THAT bear in the film". How is that a win? How does that further research into this film? The premise is flawed.

Are PGF skeptics trying to do away with what they consider the ONLY reason that they think some people consider it real? That the suit could not have been created? That once they recreate Patty, we can put the film behind us and move on?

The exercise will be virtually meaningless, in my opinion.

But the 'exercise'....(attempting to re-create Patty, as a suit)...may yield a negative result.

In your post, Harry...it sounds like you're assuming a positive outcome...that Patty's 'realistic features' could be replicated, given enough time and money.

But maybe they can't be.....and, if that were the case, then the exercise would be very meaningful...and revealing.

To date, as far as attempts go....Dfoot has failed to replicate Patty's realistic features....the BBC "orange thing" doesn't come anywhere near looking like...or, as good as..Patty....and the Morris Cow Camp Rug, encapsulating Bob....is a 'laugh your hind end off' treasure. :lol::lol:

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

But the 'exercise'....(attempting to re-create Patty, as a suit)...may yield a negative result.

In your post, Harry...it sounds like you're assuming a positive outcome...that Patty's 'realistic features' could be replicated, given enough time and money.

But maybe they can't be.....and, if that were the case, then the exercise would be very meaningful...and revealing.

Very good point. I had not considered that, because it seems that the reason for reconstruction is to indicate that Patty was not real, by those beginning with that conclusion.

You are right, an unexpected result could be for the re-creators to say, "huh, I guess it probably could not have been done".

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Fister Crunchman

That's quite a turnaround. Doesn't it assure that his documentary will be DOA? I hope he hasn't spent the big bucks on it yet.

I think Kit is radically scaling down his ambition for his documentary, if I read the subtexts of his recent posts correctly. From a sponsored big TV documentary to a (privately financed?) single release DVD--- why? Bigfoot is very popular viewing for big audiences who may have no engagement but plenty of 'idle curiousity', so there is demand for new Bigfoot angles and insights. If Kit has anything new and real, it should be a goer for the right TV company.

Recently Kit hasn't said much about his totally new and definitive evidence that the PGF film is a hoax, which he used to say was in the pipeline. Now he mentions his interviews and the 'fun and educational' Morris suit recreation.

As I have said before on several occasions, Kit would be better to put his stuff out on the internet and let interested parties see what they see in it.

Fister

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

I think Kit is radically scaling down his ambition for his documentary, if I read the subtexts of his recent posts correctly. From a sponsored big TV documentary to a (privately financed?) single release DVD--- why? Bigfoot is very popular viewing for big audiences who may have no engagement but plenty of 'idle curiousity', so there is demand for new Bigfoot angles and insights. If Kit has anything new and real, it should be a goer for the right TV company.

Recently Kit hasn't said much about his totally new and definitive evidence that the PGF film is a hoax, which he used to say was in the pipeline. Now he mentions his interviews and the 'fun and educational' Morris suit recreation.

As I have said before on several occasions, Kit would be better to put his stuff out on the internet and let interested parties see what they see in it.

Fister

Perhaps Kit is realizing who has duped who. It's a 'Long' time coming perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Either that or BH in the suit is much bigger than Patty.

Pteronarcyd,

In my humble opinion, BH may look all puffy large do to the costume, but nowhere near the size of the P/G subject. It's a optical illusion type thin' goin' on, image of BH is closer, thus appears larger is all. Just my opinion is all.

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

I think Kit is radically scaling down his ambition for his documentary, if I read the subtexts of his recent posts correctly. From a sponsored big TV documentary to a (privately financed?) single release DVD--- why? Bigfoot is very popular viewing for big audiences who may have no engagement but plenty of 'idle curiousity', so there is demand for new Bigfoot angles and insights. If Kit has anything new and real, it should be a goer for the right TV company.

Recently Kit hasn't said much about his totally new and definitive evidence that the PGF film is a hoax, which he used to say was in the pipeline. Now he mentions his interviews and the 'fun and educational' Morris suit recreation.

As I have said before on several occasions, Kit would be better to put his stuff out on the internet and let interested parties see what they see in it.

Fister

I think your hopes are getting the better of you. As in music, with this project from the beginning I have sought to ensure I have ultimate creative control. To that end, I have tried to do as much as possible on my own. The simple fact is that I will not give any specific information about what I am doing with who in terms of making this film happen because there have been fanatical cultish people who have tried to obstruct the process. Unless you think MonsterQuest and Bigfoot: The Definitive Guide are ground-breaking material, you might understand why I wouldn't want TV producers getting all over my project. I'm not making a film about Bigfoot, I'm making a film about Bigfootery. It's the chase and the chasers, not the chasee. I have spoken about undertaking a suit creation and various of the interviews since last year. In the beginning I had no plan to try a suit recreation since I am not a suitmaker, but my relationship with Phil Morris made that something I could do. The real challenge to this point has been incorporating new segments and material so as not to exceed the timeline I am aiming for. The support and interest I have received for the project both public and private has been extremely helpful and encouraging.

What I can tell you now is that if you're worried about a spoof project that lampoons Bigfooters like the following...

...you can relax. All along I've made clear I have no such intentions. It's something already done, not interesting to me, and I would be disrespecting my roots in terms of all the years I believed in Bigfoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Susiq2,

A frame that suggests that it is not her hand that causes the line on Paddy's thigh.

PattyWidthFingerBendingAG1.gif

I sincerely appreciate that you have taken the time to explain my *sighting*.I was incorrect with my hypothesis.

I wish that I had been correct, but truth is better than fiction.

:ph34r: I admit that sometimes I prefer fiction. :ph34r: when it makes me correct. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

kitakaze,

Surely it will cost you a couple bucks ta do. Do you think a DVD will sell enough to recover your costs ? Myself, no hard feelin's, but it's not somethin' I would purchase. At least through maybe Discovery Channel or the likes, it would at least maybe get air time an viewers would become aware of it, then...hopefully for you...interest in purchasin' the DVD. Otherwise, I think it'll simply remain a bill in your pocket type thin', know what I mean.

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think your hopes are getting the better of you. As in music, with this project from the beginning I have sought to ensure I have ultimate creative control. To that end, I have tried to do as much as possible on my own. The simple fact is that I will not give any specific information about what I am doing with who in terms of making this film happen because there have been fanatical cultish people who have tried to obstruct the process. Unless you think MonsterQuest and Bigfoot: The Definitive Guide are ground-breaking material, you might understand why I wouldn't want TV producers getting all over my project. I'm not making a film about Bigfoot, I'm making a film about Bigfootery. It's the chase and the chasers, not the chasee. I have spoken about undertaking a suit creation and various of the interviews since last year. In the beginning I had no plan to try a suit recreation since I am not a suitmaker, but my relationship with Phil Morris made that something I could do. The real challenge to this point has been incorporating new segments and material so as not to exceed the timeline I am aiming for. The support and interest I have received for the project both public and private has been extremely helpful and encouraging.

What I can tell you now is that if you're worried about a spoof project that lampoons Bigfooters like the following...

...you can relax. All along I've made clear I have no such intentions. It's something already done, not interesting to me, and I would be disrespecting my roots in terms of all the years I believed in Bigfoot.

The only thing that has me concerned is that you are working with Morris. In my personal opinion, he did not then, and does not now have the talent necessary to create anything like Patty. In addition to his involvement with Bob H. - Morris may be a good choice is you were making a Halloween costume, but not a full, realistic suit to the level of Patty. Just because he has claimed to have been involved in the original film, does not make him the best choice for a recreation attempt. Unless you might be trying to prove that he could not have been involved in the original.

I think this puts the whole suit creation aspect on shaky ground before it starts.

Now, if you said that you were working with Rick Baker, that might be something different all together.

And just FYI, I am not completely talking out of my butt - I do have a background in FX make-up, and Industrial Design. (I'm not expert, but just wanted to say that I think I have at least enough of an eye for this to form a valid opinion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

The only thing that has me concerned is that you are working with Morris. In my personal opinion, he did not then, and does not now have the talent necessary to create anything like Patty. In addition to his involvement with Bob H. - Morris may be a good choice is you were making a Halloween costume, but not a full, realistic suit to the level of Patty. Just because he has claimed to have been involved in the original film, does not make him the best choice for a recreation attempt. Unless you might be trying to prove that he could not have been involved in the original.

I think this puts the whole suit creation aspect on shaky ground before it starts.

Now, if you said that you were working with Rick Baker, that might be something different all together.

And just FYI, I am not completely talking out of my butt - I do have a background in FX make-up, and Industrial Design. (I'm not expert, but just wanted to say that I think I have at least enough of an eye for this to form a valid opinion)

Harry,

I think it's a good thin' to have Morris do it, as he claims it is one of his suits. In all honesty...I'm truely lookin' forward ta seein' the outcome. As you said, I think it will indeed show he wasn't nor is he capable of recreatin' anythin' close to the subject of the P/G film.

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Fister Crunchman

Harry,

I think it's a good thin' to have Morris do it, as he claims it is one of his suits. In all honesty...I'm truely lookin' forward ta seein' the outcome. As you said, I think it will indeed show he wasn't nor is he capable of recreatin' anythin' close to the subject of the P/G film.

Pat...

I think Morris and Ol Bob were by far the weakest things in Long's weak book. Nobody should have jumped in and pinned their colours there so soon, without the necessary evaluation.

Fister

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...