Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[captain koolaid]

AAM

"John Chambers was not adverse to working on uncredited projects."

But was this before Planet of the Apes? or long after? The PG film was right after, when Chambers was at his true career high, being profiled in Life Magazine, etc. Seems an unlikely time to go back to "slumming" on cheap suit remodels, at least seems unlikely to me.

Bill

Apparently, RP's project was taking place during production of "Planet Of The Apes", or just after shooting. It wasn't post-POTA release. Recall from some interviews, and/or anecdotes, that Chambers was "busy" during POTA production, and couldn't contribute much, or anything to RP's project. But Chambers either referred RP to another source, or his team/studio did the work by cobbling together existing parts. If shooting and all further production had concluded when approached by RP, time may not have been a problem. Will have to find the articles, to be sure, but the concept of paying bills with cheap jobs was not out of the question, at least in the 1960's.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

This is correct to a point, but sometimes the modifications are extensive enough to make it as much hassle as starting from scratch.

That's also a possibility. Then again, it's only "sometimes."

But was this before Planet of the Apes? or long after?

The Minnesota Iceman was made before "Planet of the Apes" and the Burbank Bigfoot seems to have been made around 1970. I don't know which episodes of Lost in Space he was involved in, but the years the show was in product could place his work before and around the same time as "Planet of the Apes."

If we count his work for the government, Chambers' involvement in resolving the Iranian hostage crisis occured in 1979, long after "the original Planet of the Apes" movie. I can't find an exact date for when the "Bigfoot"-type model displayed by Mr. West first appeared (he was showing it in the 70's after having bought it from another showman). But, as I noted before, it's also possible that it Chmabers wasn't involved in its creation. The people mentioned in the article about Chmabers that I linked to earlier might have more information about his uncredited projects, too.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I would like feedback on the possible creation of a "Destruction of Bigfoot Enthusiasts' Excuses" thread. I am undecided as to whether separating general bigfoot discussion from the PGF thread is necessary as they so often intersect. I would like to ask the regular participants of this thread their opinion on the matter.

Hey !! Don't you remember when I was giving " The Top Ten Reasons Why We Can't Find Squatch " ?


I finished up with number 1 here..

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2243009&postcount=5273


Maybe we should start a new thread ... I'm sure we could come up with a lot more than ten ...

 

[William Parcher]

I still don't think that the hypothesis of Roger Patterson creating (from scratch) or customizing/cannibalizing an existing suit(s) to arrive at a Bigfoot suit is out of the question. Yeah, I think maybe Roger could have done enough creative work at his home to nearly exclude others from actively contributing to the suit production. If building from scratch, it would help him to see almost any gorilla costume to use as a basic model. Some gorilla suits might be so close to what he needs that they would serve as the basic material and form to start a customization job.

Standard gorilla costumes were way to liberal with the furcloth. The thing ended up looking like hairy walking ape drapery. If you could cut apart one of these suits and start reducing and tucking onto padding, and then also clip the hair shorter... I think you could end up with something quite striking. Hollywood gorillas never seemed to have a visible physique quite like Patty does. She has much less hair (reduced density and strand length) than they do, and she is built to display the bulky "buffed" physique. All of that would be lost beneath the long shaggy hair of the standard Hollywood gorilla suit.

I guess I'm saying that maybe Patterson did the bulk or all of the suit work himself. I don't know squat about costume building so my speculations are purely amateur armchair blabber.

It's been mentioned that Patty has a certain sheen. I think I agree with that. Her shoulders and the top of her butt are especially shiney. These are the body surfaces that are closest to presenting a horizontal surface. Did I say that right? I mean that they are positioned to better reflect the mid-day sunlight into the lens based on the juxtapositions of the subject/sun/lens.

I wonder what circa-1967 black Dynel furcloth looks like under an October sun in Northern California? Did this stuff show much of a sheen in sunlight?

 

[Crowlogic]

The Bigfooters constantly fight against the closed-minded skeptics. Bigfoot skeptics are the same brand of people that doubted Galileo. Fools, all of them, even if they somehow could not know it at the time.

When the Bigfooters do their dance they like to have other Bigfooters watching. It's a subculture (mostly represented on the Internet) that values mutual support and admiration, even though they endlessly bicker with each other. They will join together to promote falsehoods (i.e. lots of guys have confessed to being Patty) as if they are facts. Personal responsibilities to reality (who was the first to claim multiple confessors to being Patty?) become diffused and diluted when lots of your kind are saying the same thing. At the worst, a Bigfooter only has to throw his hands up and say, "Well, that's what I was told and I presumed it was verified as fact by some kind of authority."

William

Skeptics never band together to put thier position across? I've made posts to specific members here only to have another member admit that they're acting on behalf of the poster I was communicationg with. I'm willing to bet that if I were to post a certain type of post that the flood gates would open and there would be a unified counter brought forth by the usual suspects. Everything is a subculture this is a subculture.

 

[Bill Munns]

Captain koolaid:

"Apparently, RP's project was taking place during production of "Planet Of The Apes", or just after shooting. "

The first Apes movie was released:
USA 8 February 1968 (New York City, New York)

Principle photography would most likely have wrapped in the fall of 1967 (around PG Film time) and John had been working non-stop on Apes for about a year and a half. He was exhausted when it wrapped. If you've ever worked on a major film, especially in the makeup crew where 12-14 hour days are routine and you must stick around to remove the prosthetics and wigs, etc. so the re-useable parts (wigs for sure, sometimes the prosthetics) are cleaned and stored well for their next use, you don't have a life or any time for "side jobs" or similar non-film related activities.

"or his team/studio did the work by cobbling together existing parts."

John's "team" and studio were all with him on the film. He employed 175 makeup people during filming, basically keeping everybody (who knew how to glue rubber to people or put on a mask) busy with him on that shoot through the 6 months or so before the PG film was shot. It was the most ambitious makeup film job Hollywood had seem since the Wizard of Oz 30 years before.

So call me "skeptic", but I just don't see John's involvement making sense even from this logistics and time sense, nor does it seem his "team" had any time to help a nobody (Roger) do something for a "nothing" film suit.

Bill

AAM:

I know John did do a lot of "side work" things. It's the timing thing for me. See above.

 

[Bill Munns]

WP:

"Hollywood gorillas never seemed to have a visible physique quite like Patty does. She has much less hair (reduced density and strand length) than they do, and she is built to display the bulky "buffed" physique. All of that would be lost beneath the long shaggy hair of the standard Hollywood gorilla suit."

Your amateur armchair babbling is actually "right on" (above quote). That observation is the single most relevent consideration when comparing "Patty" to standard Hollywood suits of the time.


"I wonder what circa-1967 black Dynel furcloth looks like under an October sun in Northern California? Did this stuff show much of a sheen in sunlight?"

"Dynal" was the "miracle" fiber which supposedly had the most natural hair-like sheen and was sold for women's wigs promoting how natural the sheen was, so the wigs didn't look "wiggy". So it was actually famous for having a sheen approximating human hair (at the time, compared to other synthetic hair fibers). And of course, women wore their wigs in sunlight in October, and the hair looked reasonably natural.

Bill

 

[Crowlogic]

So John Chambers was the hottest ticket in the biz in 1966-1967. He's winning awards and making a ton of money for his efforts. Then some hick cowboy comes down from outer bumbottom Washington waving $700 big ones and says "Yo Johnny love your work babe, do me a solid and make me up something real special for a little 16mm silent job I'm producing with my boys up north." Now to put it in music business terms that's just like some Joe Blow 3 chord Charlie that's making a little 4 track demo in his bedroom and walking into Eric Clapton's latest studio session waving his last 5 paychecks and saying "I think you're god dude can you put some licks on my demo man?"

There comes a point when an artist/professional reaches a certain plateau and unless you're withing reach of that plateau the door isn't gonna open for services. Suit could have come from Hollywood but second string B or C team Hollywood.

 

[Bill Munns]

Crow:

Well said.

Also, an afterthought, I was in college in 1967 ( in Los Angeles), learning stage makeup then, and the POTA team was so desperate for help on the film makeup crew, they pulled two people I knew at college who had a basic knowledge of film makeup to help on the filming crew.

If they were that desperate for extra help, why wouldn't every one of John Chambers' pals who knew about suits, fur, makeup, or the like be helping him too? I'd sure pull in every friend I knew to help if I were leading such a project. So if Prohaska, Chang, and all Dfoot's described gang were good enough to contribute to the PG film, weren't they good enough to join the POTA crew and help John Chambers pull off the Holy Grail of Makeup?

"Sorry, John, can't help you on this little "Ape"thing you're buried under with, because I have this really important guy from up north who needs a cheap suit for something vague".

Let's just say I have doubts about that happening.



Bill

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

So John Chambers was the hottest ticket in the biz in 1966-1967. He's winning awards and making a ton of money for his efforts. Then some hick cowboy comes down from outer bumbottom Washington waving $700 big ones and says "Yo Johnny love your work babe, do me a solid and make me up something real special for a little 16mm silent job I'm producing with my boys up north." Now to put it in music business terms that's just like some Joe Blow 3 chord Charlie that's making a little 4 track demo in his bedroom and walking into Eric Clapton's latest studio session waving his last 5 paychecks and saying "I think you're god dude can you put some licks on my demo man?"

This would be a nice argument if it wasn't for the fact that he'd been involved in the creation of fake Bigfoot-type bodies for a couple of carnie showmen around (and after) that timeframe (I don't think Frank Hansen went directly to Chambers, though. I do know that he had advised the hair insertion for the Iceman). I think you'd be better off arguing that he was too busy to do so (although some could argue that he merely advised some details or cobbled the suit from other costumes).

Suit could have come from Hollywood but second string B or C team Hollywood.

That is true. I'm tempted to cite the guy who did the effects for Alien Autopsy as being an example of that (due to his work on "Dr. Who"), but I can't state that for a fact since I have no idea what his status is in the British special effects industry.

 

[LTC8K6]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but it sounds like the suit you did for "Probe" was built from scratch. Dfoot's theory is that the Patty costume was constructed from preexisting costume parts with a few modifications.

Don't forget Roger's habit of not keeping promises and not paying what he owes when considering those costume costs...

 

[Bill Munns]

LTC:

"Don't forget Roger's habit of not keeping promises and not paying what he owes when considering those costume costs..."

And let's not forget that Hollywood people who do little things on the side take cash up front, no checks, no "send me an invoice".

Cash and carry, all the way.

Bill

 

[LTC8K6]

Hollywood gorillas never seemed to have a visible physique quite like Patty does. She has much less hair (reduced density and strand length) than they do, and she is built to display the bulky "buffed" physique. All of that would be lost beneath the long shaggy hair of the standard Hollywood gorilla suit.

Well, Patty wasn't a gorilla, nor was she ever intended to look like a gorilla.

She was intended to look like the contemporary drawings of a bigfoot, of course.

There was supposedly a 3 member bigfoot family roaming around Bluff Creek.

Male bigfeet were too big to make a suit for. They were supposedly 8 feet tall and up as adults. Youngsters were too small, and you'd need a child in the suit. A female bigfoot was just the right size for a human in a suit.

Voila! A female bigfoot sashays across Roger's bow at Bluff Creek.

 

[LTC8K6]

And let's not forget that Hollywood people who do little things on the side take cash up front, no checks, no "send me an invoice".

Cash and carry, all the way.

Yep, that way there are no records. No proof of who worked on what.

And no way to get your money, or the cut you might have been promised by a shyster documentary maker. No way to even legally claim anything.

No recourse.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

I know John did do a lot of "side work" things. It's the timing thing for me. See above.

Yeah. As I said before, I'm not sold on Chambers being involved; I'm just noting that Chambers has been known to do work he wouldn't necessarily be credited for. It's like how, despite my not giving credence to Bob H's claims of being Patty, I'll correct people who make erroneous comments about his statements (such as "He said he wore a football helmet under the mask").

I think that Dfoot has a much better case with Mr. Prohaska, seeing as how Mr. Prohaska gave statements that contradict what is known about him. He once said something to the effect of not knowing of where to find someone big enough to play what was seen in the P/G film. However, he worked with such people on "Star Trek" (like Buck Maffei). In a clip shown here, he says that he didn't think it would be possible to create a costume like Patty and then proceeded to give a time estimate of 10 hours for gluing on hair to a costume in order to make such a suit. But, in fairness, it's possible that he was led into those comments, had them taken out of context, or was paid to say.

Also, could it not be possible that contracts and/or studio rivalries prevented Janos and Co. from getting tapped to help with Planet of the Apes?

 

[LTC8K6]

If Ivan Marx could fool John Green and Rene Dahinden with his suit, I fail to see why Roger couldn't make a suit that was at least as good.

Let's remember that the recent notion that Patty looked real to scientists when the film was first shown is really not true.

Many scientists thought Patty was likely a hoax.

Few thought she was a real animal.

The PGF has not gotten any clearer since then.

 

[William Parcher]

Skeptics never band together to put thier position across? I've made posts to specific members here only to have another member admit that they're acting on behalf of the poster I was communicationg with. I'm willing to bet that if I were to post a certain type of post that the flood gates would open and there would be a unified counter brought forth by the usual suspects. Everything is a subculture this is a subculture.

Well, Bigfoot skeptics don't really form any kind of coherent subculture. It's not exactly a social pursuit. There are probably some essays or threads on how skepticism doesn't easily lend itself to the formation of stable social groups. There is only a handful of us on JREF and we don't do annual conferences or pig roast festivals. The Bigfooters are all set up for social bonding and cult formation. At the minimum, the Bigfoot hunters are going to often want a partner or group to go on the searches.

Just because one skeptic here can confidently answer for another doesn't mean that we agree on everything like a borg unit. We don't, and we also don't agree on how to deal with Bigfooters. You really can see differences in how Bigfooters socialize with each other vs. how JREF BF skeptics do the same.

I'll even tell you a secret that shows how much we are not a close band of subculturists. You know that guy LTC8K6? Well, he doesn't know anything about anything because he doesn't read the BFF. Can you believe that? It's like he doesn't even care about what is true and what is false in the world of Bigfoot. How can he not read the BFF? Don't forget that and whenever you respond to anything he says make sure you force him to prove his every word he says to you. He gets his lips going with a flappity-flap motion about this or that frame, or something about what Gimlin said, or a crooked toe hanging off the side. Oh, he has got 86 different links to all sorts of great Bigfoot documents, but he still doesn't read BFF. LTC will try to bluff you with his fluffy fluff. He does not know any of this stuff because he doesn't read BFF. He wouldn't even know if Brian Brown dropped dead or if Gimlin finally confessed. OK, don't tell him I told you these things. This is between you and me, Crow.

 

[Bill Munns]

AMM:

"Also, could it not be possible that contracts and/or studio rivalries prevented Janos and Co. from getting tapped to help with Planet of the Apes?"

Janos was first and formost an actor, a suit mime. He had a talent for building suits for himself and sometimes would hire out himself and his suit characters as a package.

He could also be simply hired as an actor (which tragically was his status on the Primal Man filming where he and the entire crew died in a plane crash flying home from location. I lost a good friend in that crash too, a makeup artist I'd worked with at Universal Studios).

But the POTA makeup crew was so desperate for help, they went outside the makeup union (how my two college friends got hired, even though they were non-union), and Janos sure had the skills to help the makeup crew, as Dfoot has illustrated so well. So I'd have expected John to involve him somehow.

So there would not have been any restriction of Janos not working with John on the crew. If he didn't most likely he had other industry jobs and conflict of schedule.


Then you need to consider, if Janos makes his own suits and wears them, why should he provide a suit for someone else, who may wear it and compete with him? His whole unique selling point was "I have the performing talent for suit work, and I have some great suits ready to film, saving you the cost of custom building one."

Why would he give a potential "competitor" a suit to be worn by someone other than him? For "big bucks", maybe, but $700 wasn't "Big bucks" even then.

I know Dfoot has invested a lot of time in this explanation of the film, but some elements of the suit story just don't add up to me, which is why I remain reluctant to think Chambers, Prohaska, etc. were involved.

Bill

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

Dfoot, you could be right about RP buying the suit from Hollywood, but also wrong about its true material origins and people who were involved. The only real fact we have in this thing is that we know Roger got $700 from Vilma Radford. The timing of that loan seems pretty good for getting a Bigfoot costume ready for filming (sometime prior to 10/21/67). But you really don't have to box yourself into the idea that Roger only had $700 to spend on a suit. He may have found ways to have more than this to buy a suit. Maybe he took other personal cash loans that we have no knowledge of. Maybe he somehow scrounged up $1500 to spend on a suit which he would have regarded as an essential investment towards the pot-of-gold.

On one hand, it's good that Dfoot seems to be limiting himself to amounts of money that can be back up with evidence. On the other hand, we can't say for sure that Patterson couldn't have scrounged up some money from other sources.

I also agree that it's not out of the question for Patterson to have built the suit. The only thing I'm sticking with is that the film is a hoax. The impossible timeframe and issues with rain were more than enough proof of that for me.

By the way, thanks for posting that link to "The World's Greatest Hoaxes." I missed the first half of that special years ago and had no idea that the British "foam rubber T-Rex" hoax I had heard about years ago on Usenet was a part of it (I was kinda disappointed they didn't mention the British "Spaghetti Harvest" and "Ghostwatch" hoaxes, though). The bit with Dr. Meldrum talking about how the Snowwalker footage was a hoax due to the foliage not matching was pretty amusing when you take this into account

SnowWalker" update from Dr. Jeff Meldrum (meldd@fs.isu.edu) on 12/20/96:

'Latest on the "Snowwalker" video: The matter has been taken up by a German TV producer. She has made contact both with First TV and with the former producer of Paranormal Borderline, at least the latter seems cooperative. The video was purchased by First TV for $2000. She has shown the episode footage to German specialists in Himalyan region who confirmed that the scenery is consistent with the region, and to a German zoologist who was impressed by the video. I have suggsted that she try checking the tour permits with the appropriate Nepalese government agency for a Belgian or French couple. I am trying to do some checking through my Nepalese wildlife biologist contact.'

Larry Lund's comments about how it was obvious that the anonymous video was obviously fake (such as the subject not running away) are very similar to what's seen in the P/G footage. I also found it interesting that Patterson himself said that Patty turned a couple of times, despite the film clearly only showing her turning once. I'd love to read that letter by the guy claiming to have heard Patterson boasting of the hoax. Not because I believe it or think that it's a smoking gun, but what little I saw of it makes it seem like an interesting read.

Hollywood gorillas never seemed to have a visible physique quite like Patty does.

I wouldn't go quite that far. Besides the pictures of Hollywood gorilla suits showing Pattyesque features that've been shown in the past, this kinda remdins me of Patty in terms of body shape (some features also remind me of the Freeman footage). Here's the source for that picture (in case they don't allow direct linking).

 

[William Parcher]

I know Dfoot has invested a lot of time in this explanation of the film, but some elements of the suit story just don't add up to me, which is why I remain reluctant to think Chambers, Prohaska, etc. were involved.

Stand by. I'm channeling Creekfreak. He's coming in now... here is what he seems to be asking...

Did you Los Angeles guys think with your brains enough to check Rancho La Brea to see if they got any Bigfoot bones stuck in that tar?