Jump to content

BIGFOOT: AMERICA'S ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN


HOLDMYBEER

Recommended Posts

VAfooter
Moderator

Sellers description:

 

“Excellent Preserved in a safe for 50 years. Viewed only 1 time to understand what it was. NEW!!! I just recieved this from a great person who knows what he is talking about that has been working with me on this for years. Want to follow hi advice. "“Your description of what is for sale needs to be clarified. Some will think these are the original two rolls shot in Bluff Creek. It's a documentary produced by the BBC and added to by Roger Patterson and Al DeAtley for American "four wall" theatrical touring presentation. This is very rare nonetheless, and it is not in print or even fully in bootleg. The second part of this doc still hasn't leaked digitally. These film rolls are valuable also as Bigfooting historical artifacts.The name of the film was BIGFOOT: AMERICA'S ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN. Patterson and DeAtley traveled the country showing this film with a live talk presentation. It may have circulated a bit in theater distribution after that. Only a few copies of this film are know”

 

 

Read all carefully and study pics It is what it is!!!!! Patterson Gimlin Original Footage

 

Sometime around 1970 a guy came into Dorsey Chevrolet in Tekoa Washington. His vehicle was knocking badly, and he was not going to get very much farther. He picked out a vehicle but have enough money available to buy the vehicle. He told my dad that he had something that was priceless with him that he could leave as collateral. He had 2 canisters of 16MM Kodak Film that he claimed had the only footage of Bigfoot known to man. He claimed it was worth so much money that if my dad accepted it as collateral for the balance, he would surely come back to redeem it. Think about how much interest he should have paid in 50 Years!

 

2 years ago, I was going through my dad’s safe and asked him what the heck the canisters were, He told me the story and that he never saw or heard from the guy again. They were in nearly perfect condition from being in a heavy safe all those years. I was curious so I took them to a professional and had them copied onto a DVD. From what I could see there was an underscore naming the guy that talked the most naming him Roger Patterson. I googled that name and found there was famous footage that matched some of the footage on my DVD. That footage was the from the original Patterson/Gimlin Bigfoot footage. According to history it the very first actual footage of a bigfoot. Most of the images we see today drawn, printed, on literature, bumper stickers and everything else you can think of comes from these images.

 

There is a good Wikipedia page on the films. The second small canister is seeming to be lost from what I can understand and I seem to have it. No scientist has ever been able to prove that this film is a forgery to this day. Part of the value of these canisters is the only copies that exist today are copies of the film being projected on a screen. Mine are a direct copy 16mm copy of the actual Kodak film on Kodak film in good condition. This would give scientists a higher quality version to study than the copies of a screen. My copies look to be the BBC combined version that burned up in a BBC fire or possibly the Deatley version. Wikipedia has a lot of information on them.

 

I have contacted several Bigfoot experts about these canisters and all are very interested in getting a copy “FREE” so they can copy it for “FREE”, do whatever they want with if and leave me out in the cold with nothing. These have been in my family for 50 years, I have book writers, College professors, museums, historians that all want them but I am not going to be cut out of this. Again this was shot by Patterson and Gimlin in Willow Creek, California, in the heart of the historic "Bigfoot Country." Willow Creek is where the name "Bigfoot" became a household word in 1958, after giant tracks were found and cast just north of the town, up in Bluff Creek. This is the same area where the famous 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film of Bigfoot was shot.

 

I will try to respond to any questions you ask as soon as possible but am going through stage 4 cancer treatments right now. Sometimes it is hard for me to see a computer screen and am to shaky to type. Please be patient. Send me a phone number if you wish and I will call you as soon as possible. Between treatments I live on a remote Island in on a lake in North Idaho 8 miles from the Canadian border to stay away from Covid.

 

I am not selling any rights, exclusivity, or patent with this item. I have spoken with my attorney about selling this and it is being sold as an Item that was pawned at my dad’s Chevrolet Dealership 50 years ago as collateral on a car. Again, just an item that is what it is but very rare and interesting.

 

The larger reel is 42.17 min long and the image appears about 13 min into the film. The second reel is 25.08 long

 

 

So was the original owner, Patterson? If not, who possibly? Fascinating story and discovery!

 

Film question: I am guessing that film, like VHS tape, will deteriorate over time, even if not being watched/used, correct? So how much would this film have decreased in quality during his time, if the story provided is true?  

 

I wonder if he would accept offers on the film?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Film does deteriorate but if keep in a safe or vault, it generally is fine after 50 years. I bought a lot of home movies from the 1960's and 1950's which were still in fine condition. Occasionally the dyes shift and the color balance goes off, but the actual image quality remains fairly good. Based on this person's description, I would expect it may be in fine condition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
VAfooter
Moderator

Good to know, thanks Bill!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Just to put some proper perspective on this film and it's potential for research, I would not expect anything about the actual PGF footage to be better than what we have, or any missing frames or such. So in that sense, nothing would be expected to alter the PGF analysis issue. But the films may have some second reel footage we haven't seen, and that might give us insight into what Roger shot on that second camera reel. We only have 25% of that reel, at best and that is even questionable. But we know there is at least 16 feet of Roger standing by a tree, holding footprint casts, and only 5 feet of the trackway itself. Given holding the casts could be done anytime, but the footprint trackway is perishable and should have been captured at far greater length than 4 1/2 footprints in a trackway estimated at 100+ footprints, it makes no sense for Roger to only shoot the 5 feet of trackway footage we know of. There should be more. And this BBC doc is the most likely film to find such suspected additional footage.  Also, the shot of Roger casting a footprint in plaster, we can't positively identify any surrounding to match the Bluff Creek encounter or trackway, but if there were more of that footage, we might be able to say with greater certainty if the footprint was a mere demo, or one of the real Bluff Creek trackway prints. Also anything on the much described but never seen stomp test would be incredible.

 

So these are the things that this film might reveal new insight into.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

^^^^
 

any clue Possible from a label or sticker on the film canister which might tell us where it was was developed?   If so, Might it hint toward a film 1 development suspected location from a guilt-by-association thought?


that is, if this was developed at lab XYZ then might it suggest Roger used lab XYZ as his usual lab during that time.  That might hint to location of the PGF development  site. Possible?

Edited by Backdoc
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

The film might have been developed (the print copy development) in the UK, by the BBC. If so, it would have no connection to any lab Roger himself might have used.

 

Can't be sure, without examining the film, but likely no relation to Roger's lab. To do so, the BBC would need to lend Roger a print master edited, with audio track, and all. Highly unlikely BBC would lend such. More likely they just struck off a few prints to send to Roger and Al. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...