Jump to content

The realism of the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject cannot be replicated with a costume so; what are the possibilities?


Recommended Posts

xspider1

Thank-you, salubrious.  The fair and reasonable administration/moderation is very much appreciated!  We could not be here without folks like you.   

 

So, to get back to the spirit of the original post:  

Since the realism of the PGf subject has absolutely defied replication by any actor in any costume ever, what the heck is it?  

 

an example of an earthly and relic hominoid whose kind still exist today? 

an example of an earthly and relic hominoid whose kind are now extinct?

a mutated human, or other great ape?

something from a different world and/or other dimension?

 

It would be great to know what these things are because completely normal people are continuing to report them so; are there any other possibilities?  8  )   thx

Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Thank YOU, xspider1! Great subject.

For me, as I've said several times already--the PGF issue was settled the first time I met Bob Gimlin. There is ZERO deceit in the man. If he says it was a real creature and not something Roger concocted, that's what I believe also. Arguably, not scientific but it satisfies my need to know.

Fun fact: for the movie we are going to try to recreate the PGF. We'll see how it goes :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

^ Then I will definitely be seeing the movie: "A Wish for Giants"!  Thanks for the heads up AaronD, can't wait.  :thumbsup:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So Aaron, your movie is an attempt to recreate the PGF, is this a documentary or a sci-fi type recreation of what possibly happened? AKA, are you looking to answer questions in regards to the PGF or sensationalize it ?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

No. Since the PGF is owned by Patricia Patterson I'd have to get permission to use it and a whole set of rules apply, etc. I'm going to recreate it for the viewing purpose but will add a twist to it in the form of a dream a character has--purely theatrics. It's a fictional story (my movie) and I don't intend to portray it as anything else although our "suit" will hopefully look real :)

18 hours ago, xspider1 said:

^ Then I will definitely be seeing the movie: "A Wish for Giants"!  Thanks for the heads up AaronD, can't wait.  :thumbsup:

Our website is up (under construction) but you can see the jist of the movie

http://www.awishforgiants.com/

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
AaronD

Yes the BFF is going to be featured and as of now Bob Gimlin will play himself. He's read the novel, loved it and wants to be involved. My hope is to have him present when we try to recreate the PGF but that may or may not work out. I don't wanna derail the topic here. I started another thread regarding the movie--please post there.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

We should be able to take film from 1967 and before and see other suits which exhibit the same effects as the PGF subject. I don't care if you call the legs of Patty specific muscle groups our just say 'the calf area'    We can argue as much as we want as to what detail we can and cannot see on the subject. Most people will admit they see the thigh area and calf area. These areas react similar to a walking person.

 

It should be easy to see suit effects of other suits of that era doing the same or similar things.  Show us the effect has been replicated.  Pull up a few examples and show us. There have been 100s of movies made from Gone With the Wind up to 1967.  Many of them had apes, monkeys and so on.  People in suits.  Show us some examples of how these were workable to show the effect.

 

I am not asking for people to see things to the extent I do and find them as impressive as I do on the PGF.  Just show me some old examples in other movies of calf contractions and so on in these other era suits.

 

To me, the toe extensions is big time impressive.  The other feature occurs on the lookback.  At that time Patty walking bent knee seems to step down in a bit of a lower spot and the weight of her seems to land on the right thigh. That thigh and the movements look natural.  <---- Show me a suit of that era doing that.

 

BD

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

Gimlin didn't lie in his mind. What happen was this .... Al Wright lived by Wapato and was the Chief of Police in the town of Granger and had asked his friend (Gimin) if he could use Bob's truck to haul some plywood. Because Bob used and needed his truck ...he offered to haul the lumber for Al so not to have to loan his truck out. The two men went together to pick up the plywood which Al loaded in Bob's truck. Upon completion of the loading - Al asked if he could store the plywood at Bob's place until he was ready to use it. Days later Gimlin went into the Veterans Hospital upon getting rear-ended by another vehicle. It ended up that the plywood was reported stolen and that someone had seen Gimlin's truck on site when the sheets of plywood were taken. Bob was eventually hauled in for questioning and sat in jail for several days. In the end it was found that Gimlin was not aware that Al Wright did not have permission to take the plywood which led to all charges against Bob Gimlin being dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Long: "Let me ask you: Have you ever been arrested? I've got a case on a Robert E. Gimlin accepting stolen plywood and nails. Was that you?"

 

Gimlin: "No. Not me. There's about five Robert E. Gimlins."

 

Long: "So you've never been arrested for accepting stolen property."

 

Gimlin: "I've never been arrested for anything, you know. In fact, I'm a good Christian man and I live a Christian life."

 

Bald faced lie. Gimlin flatly denies involvement in an incident he was in fact involved in. Gimlin was arrested. The case on a Robert E. Gimlin accepting stolen plywood and nails was him. Denying it and suggesting some other Robert E. Gimlin is a bald faced lie.

 

If Gimlin had zero deception in him, he could simply tell Long yes, it was him, but he was not aware the property was stolen and the charges not pressed. Instead he chose to play dumb.

 

It's his used car salesman routine. Gimlin is no stranger to deception.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
18 hours ago, Backdoc said:

We should be able to take film from 1967 and before and see other suits which exhibit the same effects as the PGF subject. I don't care if you call the legs of Patty specific muscle groups our just say 'the calf area'    We can argue as much as we want as to what detail we can and cannot see on the subject. Most people will admit they see the thigh area and calf area. These areas react similar to a walking person.

 

It should be easy to see suit effects of other suits of that era doing the same or similar things.  Show us the effect has been replicated.  Pull up a few examples and show us. There have been 100s of movies made from Gone With the Wind up to 1967.  Many of them had apes, monkeys and so on.  People in suits.  Show us some examples of how these were workable to show the effect.

 

 

That's true, Backdoc. The thigh, calf and toes of Patty's right leg all show movements consistent with real flesh/muscle.....not with a person wearing suit pants. And, in Bob H's case....certainly not with someone wearing two pairs of pants.

 

 

Quote

 

To me, the toe extensions is big time impressive.  The other feature occurs on the lookback.  At that time Patty walking bent knee seems to step down in a bit of a lower spot and the weight of her seems to land on the right thigh. That thigh and the movements look natural.  <---- Show me a suit of that era doing that.

 

BD

 

Patty does step down onto a slightly lower spot of ground....just a few inches lower. But it's enough....with her great body weight.....to produce a noticeable ripple on the thigh.

 

Another noticeable effect from that hard landing of the foot, is that her right arm speeds-up as it swings forward....so much so that it appears motion-streaked for a couple of film frames.

Here is one of those frames...

 

C8%20F363%20Crop1_zpsxsun2vhw.jpg

 

I'm pretty sure it is the only time in the film where motion-streaking is caused by the movement of the subject's body....as opposed to movement of the camera.

 

 

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, kitakaze said:

Long: "Let me ask you: Have you ever been arrested? I've got a case on a Robert E. Gimlin accepting stolen plywood and nails. Was that you?"

 

Gimlin: "No. Not me. There's about five Robert E. Gimlins."

 

Long: "So you've never been arrested for accepting stolen property."

 

Gimlin: "I've never been arrested for anything, you know. In fact, I'm a good Christian man and I live a Christian life."

 

Bald faced lie. Gimlin flatly denies involvement in an incident he was in fact involved in. Gimlin was arrested. The case on a Robert E. Gimlin accepting stolen plywood and nails was him. Denying it and suggesting some other Robert E. Gimlin is a bald faced lie.

 

If Gimlin had zero deception in him, he could simply tell Long yes, it was him, but he was not aware the property was stolen and the charges not pressed. Instead he chose to play dumb.

 

It's his used car salesman routine. Gimlin is no stranger to deception.

 

 

 

What does any of the above have to do with the PGF? And how does it help prove the PGF was faked?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor pinned this topic
  • gigantor unpinned this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
  • gigantor locked this topic
  • gigantor locked and pinned this topic
×
×
  • Create New...