Hey
William --- I can answer a little of that...
I posted those images to show what Roger and Merritt were up to. The LEFT SIDE shows GIMLIN and the guys in Roger's original movie shot in May of '67 just before he got hold of Vilma Radford's cash and went to Hollywood. The RIGHT SIDE shows Ron Olson's production made after Roger died with actors.
DDA (Noll) told me that Olson's movie had nothing to do with Patterson. I disagree.
After DeAtley had made a ton of money touring with Roger, the confession of FRANK HANSEN regarding his
Iceman Hoax hit the papers. DeAtley says when he saw that he figured the thing was about played out and he made a deal with the Olson outfit to continue working with Roger so he could go back to his business.
Ron Olson did his own documentary with Roger and helped finance all sorts of things until Roger became too ill. He later edited some of their footage about Roger's hunt into the film about Robert Morgan's hunt. That's why BIGFOOT: MAN OR BEAST seems to suddenly change in the middle.
Roger's original movie was about himself and his band of cowboys being led by an Indian Tracker familiar with Bigfoot signs and an old Miner/Prospector who rode a mule and knew the path to a certain mountain in a primitive area where Bigfoot lived.
Patterson's first lawsuit came when he, Heironimus and Gimlin were chasing a cat (pretending they were after Bigfoot) with a dog and setting up camp on a local rancher's property.
After Patterson died Olson just took all those ideas and made them into a film. He made it appear to be a documentary about the search for the creature on Patterson's film. An Indian tracker called "Tekka Blackhawk" finds footprints that cannot be faked and the old Miner leads them to the mountain where they suffer an Ape Canyon type attack. Everything in it is pure Patterson right down to the classic Sas stories being told around the campfire.
The drawings of Bigfoot fighting a bear and picking up a Volkswagon are done by Patterson. The other one portraying the Roe encounter was actually done by another artist. Patterson simply stole it and used it as if he had drawn it himself giving the artist no credit at all.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_776647a55425688e1.jpg[/qimg]
The name of Olson's film is SASQUATCH: THE LEGEND OF BIGFOOT. Patterson did not get a writing credit, however. Hey, just like Hollywood isn't it?
Green's footage of Roger in the chaps at Bluff Creek is flipped - just as the first few frames of Patty are.
The footage of Gimlin leading a packhorse from the road down towards Bluff Creek is Gimlin. The camera pans RIGHT over and up to the "tent pole trees" just before a flash and the flipped Patty appears.
Or.... if you have a different copy (such as the A & E special "Bigfoot") you'll notice that the footage they have has the
tent pole trees FLIPPED and then we see Patty (facing the correct position but a few frames further along after the flash).
All of that footage was most likely shot in the weeks or days leading up to the filming of Patty and edited by DeAtley and Patterson's editor the week before Oct. 20. The film was set, ready and waiting before they phoned anyone. Roger knew already what was on it long before Green and the guys showed up that Sunday.
Knowing Roger's movie and exploits makes reading his 1966 book all the more entertaining. In it he describes how Indian Gimlin used his tracking skills at Ape Canyon to find signs of Bigfoot before they were followed and grunted at by the beast.
He also describes how he stopped off at Bluff Creek while on his way to Hollywood in '64 and wouldn't you know it? Bigfoot tracks appear! Right in the "primitive area" that happens to be the same location he'll film Patty at some time later on. He even draws up a map for us in his 1966 book where Patty will be filmed...
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_776647919def70e2e.jpg[/qimg]
