Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 I know his track record and yet I am going to ride this one out. There is so much duplicity in the Bigfoot scene, but there is still a part of me that feels that we should not be defined by our past. Yes, Dyer is a hoaxer and loves money and fame and he is a prankster as well, but you never know, he might just have the goods this time. If we believe in the existence of Bigfoot is it so much harder to believe that someone who has been on long hunting trips might have caught one? Good comment and I too am going to ride this story out until end of April then I am walking out the door backwards with my hands in the air. Like you say, RD has been doing alot of searching trips in lots of places for several years now, so why couldnt he have really found one. If it were another hoax, then the scenario would be just two people in the wilderness no one else around, no photo no witnesses etc etc... but this is all different. How can you create an elaborate hoax with so many separate parties involved and not have any of the other parties pipe up and say 'hello..er this is all a lie'. No one has come forward to say RD is lying and you only get to sign an NDA if there has been a reason to keep quiet. Can people sign NDA's to keep a persons lie from being spread? I am sure that is not probable. I reacon the delays are also to do with legal wranglings - each parties lawyers fighting over ownership, money etc. Roll on April! I think the whole MUSKY thing is a *RED HERRING*...just another diversion. I dont think this is a red herring but is a completely futile event. Even if Musky Allen does go view the body and the body really turns out to be real, people will just say hes a liar too etc.. This story isnt going to go anywhere without more photographic/film evidence and even then people are suspicious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 you only get to sign an NDA if there has been a reason to keep quiet. Can people sign NDA's to keep a persons lie from being spread? He claims to have signed one. We don't know that he did and we don't know if anyone else did. How much do you want to bet that this Musky Allen will be signing one too? (if he even goes, that is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 He claims to have signed one. We don't know that he did and we don't know if anyone else did. How much do you want to bet that this Musky Allen will be signing one too? (if he even goes, that is). No but you're missing my point. If RD has created an elaborate hoax, why arent any of the other parties who were with him around that time (the film company and his tracker party) speaking out and saying 'look this story is a load of baloney'. No one? Even if he never was there in San Antonio during that week, then I would have thought that someone somewhere would have come forward and say 'hey I saw RD in Las Vegas on September 6th' for example? There are enough people who distrust the guy so I would have thought that someone somewhere would have disputed his claims with tangible evidence rather than just 'oh he is a known hoaxer and so therefore that is enough evidence to say that the whole affair didnt happen'. No that ISNT enough evidence to say this is a hoax. Why isnt there someone out that showing proof that RD wasnt in San Antonio during the first week of September?? No one no one?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 JackiLB - sorry, I'm a bit lost here so apologies - but why would the film company or members of his own team come out and say this is a load of baloney? And also, who would want to keep tabs on Rick Dyer's whereabouts? Thanks. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Have to agree with dopelyrics here. If I was Minnow and my movie is mostly about the hoaxers and crazies in the monster chasing field, then I would be silently cheering for every thing that RD is doing right now. It's certainly not going to hurt their movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Absolutely dmaker. A film company wouldn't sabotage their own film. They've done what a lot of people do when they want to fan the flames of rumour: they say nothing. Best. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 JackiLB - sorry, I'm a bit lost here so apologies - but why would the film company or members of his own team come out and say this is a load of baloney? And also, who would want to keep tabs on Rick Dyer's whereabouts? Thanks. Lee A witness would come out and say this story is a load of baloney if it WAS a load of baloney. Wouldnt you? If you had been there on a paid Bigfoot hunt with RD and no bigfoot showed up and no bigfoot was shot, but then weeks later RD is saying the opposite, wouldnt you pipe up and say 'hey hang on a minute, we never saw any bigfoot this is rubbish'? ? Have to agree with dopelyrics here. If I was Minnow and my movie is mostly about the hoaxers and crazies in the monster chasing field, then I would be silently cheering for every thing that RD is doing right now. It's certainly not going to hurt their movie. Hang on hang on, no one has said that the film is all about hoaxers except for sceptics who have imagined it. No one actually knows what the film is about except that its about men who try to find monsters. Have you proof of the hoax plot to the film? Link please?No, I totally disagree, if I was a serious film maker and loads of rumours were flooding the internet on bigfoot sites of a bigfoot being filmed and shot in my film and this did not happen, I dont think I would want people imagining a plot line that hadnt actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 I do agree with Jacki that not making a disclaimer could hurt the film. I f the film is released and there is no body, I can imagine that none of us are going to want to see it,lol! Although maybe the Bigfoot community s not their target audience, don't know, you would think Minnow would want it's support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) A witness would come out and say this story is a load of baloney if it WAS a load of baloney. Wouldnt you? If you had been there on a paid Bigfoot hunt with RD and no bigfoot showed up and no bigfoot was shot, but then weeks later RD is saying the opposite, wouldnt you pipe up and say 'hey hang on a minute, we never saw any bigfoot this is rubbish'? ? But, we are also talking about Rick Dyer here - trying to sell a movie. The makers of this "movie" don't care if the story is true or not - they just care about the bottom line - which is $$$. I have no doubt this is an idea Rick sold to this film company and is now doing whatever he can to sell the idea to this community and the general public. He isn't having an easy time of it though not like he did in 2008. No, I totally disagree, if I was a serious film maker and loads of rumours were flooding the internet on bigfoot sites of a bigfoot being filmed and shot in my film and this did not happen, I dont think I would want people imagining a plot line that hadnt actually happened. I hear where you are coming from, but take yourself out of the equation Films are about money. This is hype - hype brings in cash whether it be from people helping to pay the bills to get the movie shot to the people who would pay to see it. I have my own theory about how all this is gonna hit the fan - but I will keep it to myself for now - but I think this is close to being over. Edited January 24, 2013 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Can people sign NDA's to keep a persons lie from being spread? I am sure that is not probable. It happens everyday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 But, we are also talking about Rick Dyer here - trying to sell a movie. The makers of this "movie" don't care if the story is true or not - they just care about the bottom line - which is $$$. I have no doubt this is an idea Rick sold to this film company and is now doing whatever he can to sell the idea to this community and the general public. He isn't having an easy time of it though not like he did in 2008. I hear where you are coming from, but take yourself out of the equation Films are about money. This is hype - hype brings in cash whether it be from people helping to pay the bills to get the movie shot to the people who would pay to see it. I have my own theory about how all this is gonna hit the fan - but I will keep it to myself for now - but I think this is close to being over. Normally I would agree, but Minnow Films arent a commercial set up - they make documentaries for the BBC and are partially funded with grants. The British Film Institute gave them an award to make the film for a very high figure £250,000.00 (23/05/2012) : http://www.bfi.org.uk/film-industry/funding-awards This is one of the reasons why I take this whole story seriously. They're not HBO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Melissa, Actually I do recall that Dyer said that the film company does not care about what is going on in the BF community, at least as far as the "discovery" of BF goes is what I think he meant, all it cares about is money. I just don't know...this Musky Allen thing just muddies the waters and does not look good. Sorry Musky, maybe you are a righteous dude, but I do not know much about you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) [ A witness would come out and say this story is a load of baloney if it WAS a load of baloney. Wouldnt you? If you had been there on a paid Bigfoot hunt with RD and no bigfoot showed up and no bigfoot was shot, but then weeks later RD is saying the opposite, wouldnt you pipe up and say 'hey hang on a minute, we never saw any bigfoot this is rubbish'? ? Sorry, like I say, I am a bit out of the loop here - but who are the witnesses you mention? Minnow ARE a commercial set-up. They make documentaries for the BBC as well as others. They don't make them for nothing. They are not a charity. Where do you think your license fee goes?? The BFI provide grants for British film-makers, commercial or not. Thanks Lee Edited January 24, 2013 by dopelyrics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Normally I would agree, but Minnow Films arent a commercial set up - they make documentaries for the BBC and are partially funded with grants. The British Film Institute gave them an award to make the film for a very high figure £250,000.00 (23/05/2012) : http://www.bfi.org.u.../funding-awards This is one of the reasons why I take this whole story seriously. They're not HBO! That is kind of what I feel, so I think that if this is true they stand to make a lot of cash and maybe win an award...high stakes for them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 It happens everyday So are you saying that RD got all parties involved (the film crew, the people who were with him for the bigfoot tracker hunt) to sign an NDA in order that he could then lie about his story? Nah! [ Sorry, like I say, I am a bit out of the loop here - but who are the witnesses you mention? Thanks Lee Witnesses: RD has stated there was a film crew and his team there? Yeah? Arent they witnesses? Now, if those people werent there ie. RD has made the whole thing up, then why dont those people come forward and say 'we were NOT witnesses to the event RD is talking of as he made the whole story up'?? That is kind of what I feel, so I think that if this is true they stand to make a lot of cash and maybe win an award...high stakes for them... I dont think they were expecting to make a load of cash from the film but if the events really did happen, then they obviously could. However, I strongly believe that Minnow would still want to make a brilliant film that didnt just sell out to cheap sensationalism and false stories and ruin their reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts