Guest wudewasa Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 However COMIC CONS and being taken seriously by the scientific community is an anachronism. Plain and simple unless they have some brilliant way to spin it. We will see. Agreed. This show is not about the BFRO, but the misadventures of four people that happen to be members of the BFRO. There are some great folks in that group, some preferring to fly under the radar of reality TV. Much respect for those that do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I enjoy them all for the most part..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Yeti1974 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 My only hope for season 2 is that they have ACTUAL audio clips to play and analyze. They keep talking about things they hear in the woods (talking, howls, etc.) but it seems half the time they don't capture it. You would think with all the mics they have set up, they would have more audio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest billgreen2010 Posted December 1, 2011 Share Posted December 1, 2011 BREAKING NEWS second season of finding bigfoot will air january 1st 2012 it should be exciting indeedy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest billgreen2010 Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 http://animal.discovery.com/videos/finding-bigfoot-hunting-for-baby-bigfoot.html hey everyone here the all new trailer for FINDING BIGFOOT for 2012 to be continued opinions etc are welcomed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Those type of reality shows are incredibly cheap to produce compared to scripted comedy or drama. I think the game shows and talk shows are probably much less expensive than a "Sopranos". They put together a young, probably non-union production crew and have minimum compensation for the actors. They work well when you hit on a personality mix that people buy into. In this mix, MM has to be the grinch, that makes the others more likable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 They put together a young, probably non-union production crew and have minimum compensation for the actors. They work well when you hit on a personality mix that people buy into. In this mix, MM has to be the grinch, that makes the others more likable. Call MM whatever you want, but based on the past success of his BFRO expeditions where fees were charged, the guy doesn't just work for zagnut bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Sure, but compared to 6-7 figures per episode some actors are pulling in doing the scripted shows, the reality show stars are probably getting peanuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 Sure, but compared to 6-7 figures per episode some actors are pulling in doing the scripted shows, the reality show stars are probably getting peanuts. Just like the Turtleman, the cast of Finding Bigfoot are getting their 15 minutes of fame, maybe 20 if they play it hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveedoe Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 I enjoy the show. I like the researchers Matt, Cliff, BoBo and Rene. What I don't understand is it seems as though they add sounds like cricketts to the background. It must be done for dramatic effect. I have never heard crickets around the PNW during springtime or wintertime. I was watching the re-runs last night and the cast members had added comments which do explain some of my own questions. Some of the locations picked for the show around the Gifford Pinchot were not that remote. Makes me wonder of the other locations. Added sounds and special effects in my opinion does not help the show. I guess it helps the ratings but I would rather see a more realistic aproach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Biggie Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 Yep they supposedly heard 5 howls on last nights show but I could just barely hear one of them over the crickets. They are too quick to say something in a video is a bf. That footage of the supposed baby bf was no where good enough to say that either the baby or the larger figure it hopped off of were bf. I suspect it may have just been a person with a pet primate but the footage was not good enough to really tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted January 2, 2012 Share Posted January 2, 2012 "Boon Boon?!" Yep, recycling cliques again. Agreed, they say that they are hearing howls and other noises, but there is no audio on the show to support their claims (just spooky music and canned wildlife sounds). Are we supposed to accept their words about the purported audio? They need to analyze the vocalizations back at home base, compare them to other sounds of known wildlife. Don't just say "It's a squatch!" However, I must give credit for MM presenting himself in a more professional demeanor. While he is still convinced that bigoot is everywhere and is enthusiastic in proclaiming such, he seems to be acting as a member of the team, and letting go of his past behaviors. Yes, the editors may be working overtime to potray him as such, but I'd like to believe that he can, and has refined himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I enjoy Finding Bigfoot, and look forward to watching it every week. I don't agree with everything the cast members have to say, but I am not being paid to review any of it either. As for the Finding BF episode last night, my biggest complaint...well, only complaint, was the footage that brought the cast there to start with. I don't see the "NY Baby" footage as any kind of serious BF evidence at all, and am actually surprised that any serious researcher or person with high school sciences under his belt would consider it as such either. I'll give my 3 main reasons for not believing this video depicts a sasquatch baby swinging around in a tree: First, a mother BF walks behind a group people partying in a clearing in the woods, and instead of leaving or hiding with her infant, she decided to let him play in the trees. This is rather difficult to swallow when the species is supposed to be super stealthy and secretive. Above all, it is certainly against the instincts of any creature on earth, including humans, to place its baby in a potentially dangerous situation. Second, only lesser apes (gibbons, etc.) brachiate, not great apes, with the lone exception being that orangutans semi-brachiate. However, none of those primates are or ever become adept at bipedal locomotion, and they remain largely arboreal their entire lives. Monkeys brachiate and swing through trees, great apes (orangutans excepted) do not. For those who believe BF are humans, humans are considered great apes as well. Third, of course, since this is an alleged BF video, the film is very grainy, and becomes worse when it is blown up for further scrutinization. However, basic size ratios can be made. The most important one is the size of the head of the figure that appears to be holding the "baby" compared to the size of the "baby" itself. Given this ratio, the "baby" would be very young, certainly not walking well yet, but perhaps taking a few steps. Remember that primate young are very helpless and dependent upon their parents for a long period of time; years in most cases. If the "baby" was indeed the baby of a derelict BF mother who carelessly walked out to watch a group of humans party, there would be no way it would be able to climb the tree like a spider monkey and brachiate around from limb to limb, considering it would likely be merely a year or two old. Even the young of gibbons and other apes that use brachiation as their primary mode of locomotion are not that adept. Just as in humans and other species, it takes years of practice to get really good at something, like walking, running, and swinging around from limb to limb. My opinion: Someone at the party that was being filmed had a monkey, and he walked over to the tree to let it exercise and climb for a few minutes. The person who took the video doesn't remember that person and their pet spider monkey, or they were too inebriated to remember. 15 years later, they don't even remember most of the people at the party, much less how to contact any of them. That is my opinion. Whoever wants to can agree or if you want to disagree, please provide intelligent arguments demonstrating your view. One thing I am curious about, though, is this: I am aware of a few other photos/videos where either a baby BF was shown, or a baby was with its mother, but never one in which the baby/youngster was running around, playing, etc. Is anyone else aware of such a video or photograph? More specifically, has there every been another case where a baby/infant/young BF has been described (or photoed/videoed) swinging through the trees like a spider monkey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 3, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted January 3, 2012 Well I usually detest being dissuaded by a skeptic, but autumnforest on one of the comments of the youtube video or websites offering the vid. said it looked like loose, swinging branch litter in the trees and the resolution was such that how would you prove it is even something animated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Agreed, they say that they are hearing howls and other noises, but there is no audio on the show to support their claims (just spooky music and canned wildlife sounds). Are we supposed to accept their words about the purported audio? They need to analyze the vocalizations back at home base, compare them to other sounds of known wildlife. Wude, I heard the "wooooo" howls on the program audio, although it was rather faint. I even watched the episode again at midnight (and turned up the tele sound system volume) to confirm it . I have a question in to Cliff, about the audio being recorded live at the scene, and not simulated in the production. I have read (and only repeating it here), that vocal simulations was one of the things, that the cast was unhappy with in the production, in the first season.. and would be ironed out with the producers for season 2. It interests me, because the episode is from my home state, and not far from areas we have investigated. I've recorded very similar unknown sounds, that didn't sound canine, and also heard them live in the field. Not trying to convince anyone here, that it's BF, nor is anyone required to take anyone's word.. on anything . I'm disappointed with the animated creature simulations ( but not the witness encounters and stories ), and it looks like it will be the same standard hulking snarling beast, in all of the encounter reenactments... no matter where they investigate. Witness descriptions can vary quite a bit, in different regions of North America. In our region.. a leaner , lankier creature has been witnessed in many encounters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts