The Patterson-Gimlin Film

In 1967, two men reportedly went into the woods of Northern California on horseback in search of Bigfoot and came back to present, only a portion of their film taken, that shows what appears to be a female Bigfoot walking across a creek bed in the Bluff Creek area of Northern California.

This piece of film (thankfully later stabilized and cleaned up for best viewing by MK Davis), has become one of the most polarizing captures of a "cryptid" ever taken. Nearly 50 years later, we still debate whether or not this was real or hoax. And, most of us in our 40s, 50s, 60s were influenced greatly by that striking bit of film at a young and impressionable age. Little cryptid para geeks were born upon the first viewing.

For those who refuse to even embrace the notion that Bigfoot could exist, film, photos, and anecdotal accounts mean nothing. To the more open-minded, they are willing to give the film a study, listen to people who claim to be hoaxers from the film, listen to experts evaluate the film, and then come to a conclusion. 

I was well into my late 40s before I was willing to even consider the film as legitimate and the reason was because of the questionable motives and unclear character of the men involved and the fact that they went searching for and found a Bigfoot. 

However, there was something about the film that nagged at me, something from my own encounter viewing a Bigfoot in the Sierras in the mid 1980s: The proportions and overall gait of the individual. 

It wasn't until I studied better images that I pondered a few things, like the shorter muscular legs and longer body proportions of this hairy walker. When I compared her legs to her body height, they were 1/3 of her height. 

For us Homo sapiens, our legs are much longer in proportion to our height. In fact, if my legs were 1/3 of my height, I'd be 96 inches (8') tall instead of 68 (5'8")! 

It seems rather hard to capture that in costume in 1967 or even today - having a working head while an elongated body. 

As well, she appeared to have her hair braided, her breasts swinging, and these are things that make a hoax so much harder. I doubt that P and G had the cash to make that happen with ahead-of-its-time special effects.

No matter where children of the 60s and 70s stand on the PG film, there is no doubt that the very notion of Bigfoot having free run of the woodlands of America formed a lot of our minds with wonder and excitement about what else is out there awaiting discovery. 

More info:
Interesting finding by MK Davis

MK Davis has meticulously gone over every frame of the film and has shared a great deal on his YouTube channel for the public to see without profit or notoriety, simply an offering to other para geeks to see what they think of the film with the most accurate bits he can elucidate for our viewing. Here's his channel on YouTube if you want to see his work. 


  1. The film maybe the best evidence yet the most argued about Bigfoot

  2. For years I really wanted to believe this film footage could have been authentic.... but after the confessions of Phillip Morris (the costume maker) and Bob Heironimus (who claims to have worn the suit in the film), plus the details laid out by Greg Long in his book "The Making of Big Foot", I no longer accept the film a genuine. I still think the creature can and may exist, but sad to say... I no longer consider this viable evidence.


Post a Comment