Jump to content
Bill

Think Like A Hoaxer

Recommended Posts

Bill

Think Like a Hoaxer

Our well known member, Kitakaze, has often said we must think like a hoaxer to understand the truth of the PGF. There's a lot of merit to the idea, and I've been doing some work where that idea keeps popping up. So I thought it may be worthy of discussion. And I'll be glad to start it off.

So I have my "hoaxer" thinking cap on, and here's how I'd think it through.

1. I wouldn't do it in fall of 1967. Roger was in remission with his cancer and thus not in any particularly urgent need of getting his hoax pulled off. He had enough of his own life's future to look forward to that he could choose his time. If we are to believe that he's been thinking about some hoaxing for several years, then he definitely chose his time. According to the history of the PGF, in August of 1967, John Green and Rene Dahinden were investigating a situation with footprints in the general vicinity of the Bluff Creek location (Blue Mountain? Blue something, I never can seem to remember it's name), and that report of footprint activity got conveyed to Mrs. Patterson, and she told Roger and thus he was prompted to organize the October Bluff Creek expedition which lead to the PGF.

So as the story goes, that's Roger's reason (excuse, alibi, cover story?) to go to Bluff Creek to stage his supposed hoax. But if he hoaxed the film, he chose the time to stage the hoax. It didn't happen as an unscheduled, unpredictable event.

Okay, why would I not do it in the fall of 1967? Because the August 18, 1967 issue of LIFE magazine (with a cover of European supermodel Veruska) ran a four page spread on the Planet of the Apes makeup work for the soon to be released movie, and mentioned the $1 million budget just for the makeup work, and I'd sure like to know more about what my little fake bigfoot film is up against. I'd like to see the movie to see if they do any full naked body costumes, if they did any naked female bodies (not likely but worth checking to see), and I'd like to read some reviews about what looks real and what looks fake to the public. then I would have a better idea of how to fashion my hoax costume and staging of my encounter. I'd like to see how these ape characters move, and if the movements are judged realistic or fake and hokey. So I'd be able to tell my guy in the costume how to act.

So if I'm not really under the gun, timewise, I'd bump my bigfoot filming back to spring 1968, once POTA came out and I saw it and the public reaction to it.

2. I wouldn't film the guy on horseback pulling a packhorse through the woods, as my supposed lead-in footage (the "what did you film before your unexpected encounter with the creature"?). Frankly, that footage looks like I'm doing some PR TV commercial filming for a tourist Dude Ranch.

Instead, I'd do some "This is where John and Rene found their footprints last August" stuff, and this is why I'm here" footage. Then, maybe a "here's our base camp" segment, and a pan around to show the woods around us. Then I'd fix a broken branch too high for any other native animal to do ("Bob, as you ride under that branch, tie a rope to it and tie that to your saddle horn and pull that sucker down, so I can film the "suspicious broken branch".) Something to suggest, "here's something strange but we don't know exactly what to make of it, but maybe there's a creature in these woods". Then I'd make some poor partial footprints, maybe going up a wooded slope, vague but promising as evidence, and film them, and plan to say we found them slightly off our open trail, when Bob was looking for a tree to answer the call of nature.

Then I'd do a bit of riding through thick brush to suggest "wow, we really are in the middle of nowhere, and no humans around for a hundred miles" (to set up a "nobody could pull off a hoax in this kind of wilderness" suggestion).

And then, I'd do the "encounter".

And I'd make sure and keep that reel together so everybody would see the set-up stuff.

3. I really would think twice about starting the fake encounter with a creek and ravine between me and my guy in the costume, if I'm going to chase him. I've already commented about this in the Report thread awhile back, why I think this is not what a hoaxer would do, and I still think so.

But, okay, it was the only location that had that great log so I could match my storyboard sketch. So I'm going with this Bluff Creek spot to do it. But if I'm going to have to chase across that frickin' creek, I'd sure want to show it. Might even add some drama to the chase, in segment 2, while I'm still running toward the creek, I'd keep the camera running for a second or so as I see the creek (and get it on camera clearly, not just a two frame trigger slip where it's in the bottom frame and might get masked off by a projector masking). So I'm make sure and show the creek good, but shakey, as I'm pretending to act like "****, that creature will get away if I don't run across this creek".

4. I'd do something as I run up the creek bank to resume the chase, waving the camera wildly, and try to get my faithful sidekick, Bob G. on his horse, rifle in hand, so I can confidently make that bold charge to my fixed lookback position, knowing my sidekick has got me covered. Segment 4 is ideal, because I'm wildly thrashing the camera every which way, and Bob on horse, rifle in hand, is better than that weird log that looks like a big dead fish.

5. Finally, as my costumed guy passes the debris right after his lookback, I'd tell him to turn on me, partially hidden by the trees and debris, and grab something (rock, short branch piece of wood, something), and throw it at me. Then I can wave the camera wildly while dodging this thing thrown at me. Then I settle in to film it walking away and run out the film.

6. Then for my second reel, I'd make sure I establish the same recognizable area, and show the trackway we faked, in the Bluff Creek scene, with my sidekick walking along the trackway and pointing to the tracks beside him as he walks, with a "here's a real good one" attention to a nice footprint. And then I'd show trying to get our "spooked" packhorse to get the plaster for making footprint casts. "Wow, that poor horse is terrified".

So, trying to think like a hoaxer, that's what I'd do. But that sure isn't the PGf as we know it.

Bill

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

One way to see how a hoaxer thinks, is to watch any one of a million "Bigfoot videos" on Youtube......like this one, which is a great example...

This video has one of the 'Classic' hoax traits....it's short. ;)

Conversely...one characteristic that the PG Film and the Memorial Day Video have in common, is the extended length of the filming.

Roger filmed for a full minute, filming until he ran out of film....and, the MD Video...Lori Pate continued running the camcorder, panning the woods, well after the subject disappeared into the trees.

(I have a special, full-length copy of the MD Video...with audio.)

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BuzzardEater

Suppose, in rehearsal, you realized you couldn't show the suit doing anything except walk and you couldn't even show that in any detail. What to do? You can't show the actor floundering around in the costume, the arm extensions will show! There are other obvious production decisions made, too. Why show a little old lady BF? Why not show a big buck? That'll sell! I think the answer is that it is too hard to fake a ten footer. The same is true of moveable hands and expression change. It can be done, but not easily, if you are committed to a single shot narrative.

Patty is just an image. An icon to represent a belief. How the image was created is no longer relevant. The work is done. The goal of the image is to put a face on the phenomena. It's like anything. Marilyn Monroe wasn't blond, Lucy wasn't a redhead and Elvis didn't have black hair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Think Like a Hoaxer

*snip for space*

So, trying to think like a hoaxer, that's what I'd do. But that sure isn't the PGf as we know it.

Bill

You left several considerations out. The biggest one being that in "pre-production" you'd need the lead time for suit construction/purchase. That would mean more lead time to find your money man.

When did Mrs Patterson get wind of the activity? That is the earliest the process can START, under your postulated scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

Good topic! Roger's other documentary film footage doesn't make any sense for a hoaxer. And, neither does the PGF.

On the other hand, thinking like someone who is looking for Bigfoot, finds a Bigfoot, is ready to film a Bigfoot and films a Bigfoot makes perfect sense in regard to what we see in the film. :thumbsup:

Edited by xspider1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

A really excellent thread this. I hope this leads to much discussion.

I can't see why any hoaxer would choose to do his hoax in bright daylight out in the open and at relatively close distance. What hoaxer RUNS AFTER their man in suit and then gets a relatively clear and steady shot of it in almost full view? Unless they are going for laughs then hoaxers just don't do that.

I also wonder what hoaxer then lets HIMSELF be hoaxed by the Joe Metlow Bossburg shenanigans a few years later as well as the Yeti in Thailand con job?? :wacko:

If we are to believe the hoax scenario then why would Patterson have been so gullible and naive to fall for the hoaxes of others? Hoaxers do the hoaxing. They don't get hoaxed themselves and especially if they are the clever hoaxer type, which anyone who carried out the PGF 'hoax' (assuming it was one for a minute) simply MUST have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

Bill,

In addition to all your other points I would also make up a story about weird sounds and strange 'possible' shadows seen in the night during the week leading up to the footage to explain why I stayed in the general area for a considerable time. I would also probably pretend to have found a lot more tracks and evidence of passage for the 'tracking Patty after the filming story'. If I could place footprints at the film sight I'd also place a few footprints here and there along the route Patty walked and then filmed them as evidence that she was tracked for a long way.

The place that Green and Dahinden saw the tracks in late August was Blue Creek Mountain and Onion Mountain by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

Well if I were a hoaxer, I certainly wouldn't go around and tell people that I harldy know that I'm making a hoax.

I wouldn't screw anybody out of money that was involved, which would potentially expose the hoax.

I wouldn't do anything that would risk leaving behind a paper trail or documentation.

I wouldn't do the hoax in a hot spot that was actively monitored by multiple researchers.

I definitely wouldn't waste the money I made off the hoax on Bigfoot research inspired by my hoax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I wouldn't do the hoax in a hot spot that was actively monitored by multiple researchers.

Excellent point. To expand on that a little bit - - -

I wouldn't do a hoax in an area that I'm not very familiar with, that I cannot control who can enter the area.

I wouldn't do a hoax in an area that I already know that the loggers and other forest workers are carrying high powered rifles with the intent to shoot on sight - a Bigfoot.

I wouldn't include a friend without telling him in the hopes that I could fool him too.

I wouldn't even have the horses in the area not knowing if they might get spooked, let alone try to start the whole thing on horseback.

It has been mentioned elsewhere but also a good point - I would not travel so far to do the hoax when I could easily film it at a place closer to home that I am much more familiar with and that is fences off, and simply claim that it was where ever I wanted to say it was.

I wouldn't spend nearly 3 weeks camping out prior to doing the hoax just for show when a couple of days would do, especially when I knew that my friend had only wanted to spend 2 weeks on a real search trip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If I wanted to fake a Bigfoot film, I certainly wouldn't have the Bigfoot walk 300+ feet on a sandbar. I'd then have to spend a lot of time and effort making hundreds of fake footprints because I'd be worrying about the Bigfoot hunters coming to inspect the filmite, which is what happened. To make the film more exciting, I'd have my creature walk towards the camera instead of away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

I also wouldn't have my Bigfoot walking out in wide open sunlight and making the suit easily open to inspection and scrutiny. I'd have him walking through shadowy forested area or brush which could conceal any flaws in the movement or details of the costume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

I wouldn't have done a lot different that what Patterson did assuming he hoaxed it. But some things I would have. I would have shot the Bigfoot sequence in the middle of the reel with ample footage of the tracks (real or faked)as part of the main reel footage. I would have had the second reel as the one following the trail of the creature showing as much trackway and disturbances as I could muster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

Think like a hoaxer? Ok if I need more money then I will do another hoax, this time as a silent third party behind it.

Roger didn't do that. Instead he got caught up in wild goose chases instigated by others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

I also wouldn't have my Bigfoot walking out in wide open sunlight and making the suit easily open to inspection and scrutiny. I'd have him walking through shadowy forested area or brush which could conceal any flaws in the movement or details of the costume.

Yes and that way you could make it even more tantalising by stretching the footage out and having it move from tree to tree and 'watching' you before crashing off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Among many things Patterson--assuming that he was a hoaxer--had to plan, one thing was making sure that he enough film in his camera for a Bigfoot sequence occurring at the END of a film roll. In other words, he had to know in advance how long the Bigfoot sequence would be, and then time the horse scenes accordingly. Thus, if Patty was a hoax, then the horse footage is also part of the charade and should not be overlooked for clues of deception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...