Author Phil Farrand
is known for his "Nitpicker's Guide" books exposing the errors,
flaws, plot discrepancies, and production oversights for television series
including the X-Files and Star Trek. It appears now that another film
has fallen under the scrutiny of nitpickers...but not Mr. Farrand.
Clifford Crook and author Christopher L. Murphy, two bigfoot enthusiasts, claim they have
found evidence to support the story behind the famous 1967 Patterson/Gimlin film as a hoax.
They base this claim
on findings by Chris Murphy in 1995 when he used a photocopier
to duplicate a frame of the footage and became increasingly suspicious
as he zoomed in on a "bottle opener" shaped object at bigfoots
waist. The object appeared in four consecutive frames and seems to be
moving with the fleeing Sasquatch. Murphy theorizes this object is geometric
and man-made....a fastener keeping the bigfoot costume in place.
researcher, Clifford Crook supports Chris Murphys idea that the
Patterson film is a hoax. Interestingly, the X-Project Magazine, along with many
of our readers, have cast a skeptical eye on a famous photograph published
by Crook in 1995, showing an alleged bigfoot in a swamp.
This is not the first
time that the famous 30-second 16mm film footage, showing a female Sasquatch
escaping into the woods of Bluff Creek, California in 1967, has suffered skeptical
claims of fakery.
Strange Magazine editor Mark Chorvinsky conducted
a one-year investigation into claims that the famous Patterson bigfoot
was actually a man in an ape suit fabricated by sophisticated Hollywood
make-up and special effects. Chorvinsky haggled with Bobbie Short for months trying to obtain rights to her audiotaped interview but a deal was never struck.
suggest Hollywood make-up artist John Chambers was involved in creating
the fleeing man-beast. John Chambers is credited with several cinematic
costume/make-up projects including "Planet of the Apes", "Outer
Limits", and "Lost in Space". Chambers is believed to be
the only person who had the knowledge and skill to create such a realistic
bigfoot in the Patterson film at the time. (see note at the bottom
of this article)
Among the other criticisms
of the Patterson film is the fact that Patterson conveniently ran
out of film, providing a safe reason for ending the taping...perhaps to
limit the likeliness that other production flaws would be discovered,
as some suggest. Nevertheless, the Patterson bigfoot is the standard for
many researchers who compare plaster casts of tracks against the creature.
Much information on bigfoots behaviour and anatomy has been taken
from analysis of the film as well.
Crook and Murphys
claims are probably not going to have a very devastating impact on the
Patterson bigfoot film, as it has avoided concrete evidence of fakery
over the last 30 years of its existence despite similar claims from others.
We will just have to wait for the next observation that once again sheds
controversial light on an already controversial film.
The Nando Times
New Claims allege Bigfoot film was Hoaxed - Nando Media and Associated Press 1999
of 1997 Bobbie
Short interviewed John Chambers in person in his facility and recorded on audiotape John Chambers lack of personal involvement and his denial that he
had anything to do with the alleged costume for the Patterson-Gimlin Film;
in fact, he claimed he didn't know either man at the time the film was
made. He was busy doing his Academy Award winning work for the 1968 release
of "Planet of the Apes," which was as good as his ability with
costume work ever got and it won the Academy award that year.
Have a look
at "Plantet of the Apes," the costume work Chambers did, it
was top of the line in 1967 and 1968, yet none of the costumes come even close
to resembling that of the Patterson film. Chambers, of course,
died in August of 2001, but his interview was personally audiotaped by Bobbie
Short and another videotape done by Scott Essman. Any of the
Hollywoodites who proclaim Chambers made the costume for Roger Patterson
need to try and duplicate it today; it still cannot be done. Chambers
is on record saying he was the best and he could not have duplicated
what he saw in the Patterson film. It should also be
noted that Mark Chorvinsky of Strange Magazine NEVER interviewed John
Chambers and his haggling for the rights to Short's interview never came to fruition.
Back to What's New?
Back to Newspaper & Magazine Articles
Portions of this website are reprinted under the
Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law
as educational material
without benefit of financial gain.