Jump to content
HOLDMYBEER

BIGFOOT: AMERICA'S ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN

Recommended Posts

HOLDMYBEER

The Bigfoot Filmography really has no information as to the original editing. The book indicates DeAtley had the editing done and that DeAtley was largely responsible for the production of the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
Posted (edited)

My exposure to the PGF came from Peter Graves Bigfoot/ Monsters show which appear at our local theater in the 1970's.  That makes me too young to remember any Bigfoot hype in the 1967/68 era when Roger was touring with this film.  Those who saw Roger's bigfoot tour might be many but still would be considered few in number overall.

 

I have a couple Q about Roger's film tour from the perspective of the skeptic/ 'Science' world:

 

1)  How much interest did 'science' even show back in 1967/68 and later in 1976 or so? After all, unless they attended one of Rogers film showings I have to think even seeing the PGF was not all too common.  I would think other than a few still pics out of Argosy magazine or something like it seeing it was not common.  I do at least remember these were the days were if we didn't watch the Wizard of Oz on TV the night it was on we weren't going to see it again until it aired on TV next year.

 

2)  How much Push Back was there from the 'science' community.  Did they even bother to comment on it or was it so insignificant they didn't lower themselves to even swat at such a fly in some of their minds?

 

Clearly by the time Peter Graves show came around someone thought the Bigfoot subject and esp the Patterson film was something to cash in on. 

 

My guess would be there was little interest or in the minds of the science community not much need to do any major push back on Bigfoot or many of the topics back then.  

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HOLDMYBEER

BD,  I think John Napier's book Bigfoot; The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality, 1973, goes a long way towards answering your questions. It's been 40 years since I read the book but I recall Napier (a well-known primatologist) wrestling with the film with much discussion. I am told the book is now back in print.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Prior to the PGF Event was there really any Bigfoot subject featured in a film?  A saw Peter Graves and so on back in the day Post-Patterson and Bigfoot shows which included some Loch Ness monster stuff.  Was there really much if anything out there Prior to the PGF Event?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HOLDMYBEER
Posted (edited)

In terms of film there was the Ivan Marx fiasco, eventually proven to be his wife in a suit.

 

Edited: Sorry, the Ivan Marx film was 1971.

Edited by HOLDMYBEER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

 Early showings of the Patterson Gimlin Film?

 

 

 

 I’m assuming that the original real one and the original real 2 were locked in the vault somewhere in 1967/68.   First run copies were made of reel one and I’m going to assume reel number two .   In order to have a film which would run in projectors in the early days of showing the Patterson film did someone make a master copy of reel one AND reel 2 and splice them into one film? Does that sound correct?      

 

 If they were doing their showings using the floor wall technique,   I assume they were showing the film itself in the form of real one and then right after showing the stamp test and the track way and whatever else we attribute as real number two .    Shouldn’t there be some movie copy out there where the entire viewing copy is Reel 1 and Reel 2?   Shouldn’t there even be a couple of those for the extensive viewing at multiple theaters?

 

  Does it go something like this :

 

Reel 1.  The PGF

Reel 2.  The stomp test and trackway

 

 

1967/1968  Early theater promo showings of the PGF :

= [ Reel 1 + Reel 2 ].   <======== multiple copies of one film made by combing both films combined into a single film

 

 

Does anyone know?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

A few corrections:

 

1. It's "four walling", not floor walling. You literally rent the four walls of the theater which comprise the building. 

 

2. Roger's first and second reel of camera footage at Bluff Creek is not the same as the theatrical program's reel one and two. 

 

Roger's camera reel one is 76 feet of horse and rider footage, and 23.8 feet of Patty at Bluff Creek. Run time is approximately 4 minutes.

Roger's second reel is uncertain, usually described as showing the trackway, the track casting and Roger by a tree holding two footprint casts. The stomp test is rumored, but not confirmed.

 

The theatrical reel one is about 30 minutes long, and features mostly Al DeAtley in an office talking about the PGF. There's also some footage of men outdoors, some of the six cowboys wandering around the woodlands, and Roger demonstrating how a footprint cast is made.

 

The Theatrical reel two isn't confirmed as to content, but generally described as showing the PGF encounter segment. It's exact length isn't known.

 

Theatrical reels are generally 30 minutes, at most, for 16mm film, and 20 minutes at most for 35mm film. So multiple reels are necessary for a film running more than 30 minutes. I've purchased some old 16mm feature films (including an early Tarzan film to study the ape suits), and it came to me as three 30 minute reels.

 

So PGF footage and camera reel two material would be edited into the theatrical program reels.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LucasJ
On 5/2/2019 at 12:16 AM, Backdoc said:

Prior to the PGF Event was there really any Bigfoot subject featured in a film?  A saw Peter Graves and so on back in the day Post-Patterson and Bigfoot shows which included some Loch Ness monster stuff.  Was there really much if anything out there Prior to the PGF Event?

Well there were a few films in the 50's about the Yeti...a Japanese film called ,Jû jin yuki otoko(1955),

more familiar is the Abominable Snowman(1957)(which is pretty good) which came after the footprints were photographed in the Himalayas

Ivan Sanderson wrote a book about the subject a few years prior to the PGF

---

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Bill,

 

Sometimes on the BFF it can be hard to remember what was posted in the context of the post.  I say this because I seem to remember a poster saying something about claiming to have seen the early showings of the PGF in the PNW.   In that, as I remember, the poster stated they thought they remembered seeing some footage of the stop test from claimed reel #2 in that early four-walling showings.  

 

This is what made me ask my most recent Q.   The problem is, I am not sure if the person actually claimed that in the posting or if it was something they heard someone else claim.  That is, I may have that completely wrong.  It could have even been the poster was claiming no such thing and just asking if anyone attended those early showings in the 1968/69 showings.  I thought I remember reading a post with something like, "I seem to remember..." regarding seeing the stomp test. I am starting to think I had this all wrong.  That is why I was asking about just what was the content (to any extent we can know) shown to audiences back then.  

 

Thanks for the info Bill.  

 

I guess my hope was there would be some sort of long lost theatrical presentation which included not just Reel #1 which we have all studied but at least some of any claimed content of Reel #2.

 

Finally I pretty much doubt anyone claimed to actually have seen that reel #2 stuff in those early showings in spite the impression I had (incorrectly) got from my memory of postings on the BFF.  That is how it goes sometimes.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

LucasJ:

 

The video you posted is interesting, as a full first camera reel example, but the image quality is frankly appalling (not blaming you, for the record). It has been copied so many times that all detail is lost and the color tones have been reduced to very basic tonal levels, plus it has some bizarre rippling distortion.

 

Compared to any good film scan of the same footage, it's terrible. 

 

Sadly, it's these kinds of copies that foster the false claim that the film doesn't show detail. But sadly, YouTubers will continue to produce such without realizing they are harming the research effort more than helping it.

 

Again, not blaming you for the video, and appreciate your bringing it to our attention.

 

Bill

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Travis

Have you ever seen a Sasquatch Bill? I’m curious what your authority on the topic is because the two  I saw looked nothing like the Patterson filming thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor
BFF Donor
32 minutes ago, Travis said:

because the two  I saw looked nothing like the Patterson filming thing 

 

You've seen TWO bigfoots?!

 

Wow! Do tell the story.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Travis

Honestly I’ve seen two of ‘em. Believe I spoke of it in my early postings looked more like a big sloth then people started suggesting bear. Neither was bear but has bill seen a Sasquatch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hyslothesis

Hello, I'm very interested in the bigfoot ground sloth hypothesis, can you please tell me about your sighting? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

🧐

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...