Page 21 - 2011 - The 'X' Chronicles Newspaper - January 2011

Is The Patterson Film Too Good A Hoax? Is The Patterson Film Too special effects artists—many of whom were not costume, some thorough research by writer Good A Hoax? even alive when Patterson shot his footage—are Mark Chorvinsky failed to produce a single witness who could verify the claim first-hand. less impressed; they have the materials and Continued from Page 20 resources available today their forebears never Evidence of Chambers' role was anecdotal, dreamed of. Perhaps that's why the "old school" hearsay, and "general knowledge" within the SFX Artists Think Film is Fake seemed more uniformly impressed with the industry, but no one—including Chambers Patterson film; they know how difficult such a himself (in a 1995 interview)—has ever suit would have been to make in 1967, a point admitted to producing the costume. This in itself Debunkers of the Patterson film that today's artisans often overlook. seems remarkable; as such a confession would frequently point out that modern special effects This point is further underscored by produce quite a sensation in the industry and artists usually consider the image in the film to recent attempts to "fake" Bigfoot film for immortalize its creator. Certainly, the long- be a suited man. Some have even maintained it television documentaries. Such efforts routinely since-retired Chambers had nothing to lose by was "well known" within the industry the demonstrate that despite the significant admitting the hoax and, in fact, could have only "creature" was the work of special effects advances in costuming available today, no one enhanced his reputation as one of the greatest master John Chambers—a man who had could get a guy in a fur suit to look like anything effects artists in history. The "Chambers Story," considerable expertise in the field of "hairy but a guy in a fur suit. One recent effort, actually then, appears to be nothing more than a case of monsters" through his work on television shows shot at Bluff Creek by the BBC for Discovery a smoking gun without a gun. like Lost in Space and The Outer Limits. Channel's television special X-creatures, had a While it is true that modern effects man in a Bigfoot suit (inexplicably covered in (Continued on Page 24) artists likely could reproduce the Patterson long red yak fur rather than the short, coarse, creature, it must be remembered that much has black hair seen on the Patterson creature) changed in the industry since 1967. Modern retrace the path taken by the "thing" in the film materials and techniques, as well as the money in an effort to demonstrate how "easily" such a to put into such elaborate costumes, simply film could be faked. While the producers were not available 35 years ago, a point often presented the spectacle as evidence of a hoax by overlooked by most debunkers today. Patterson, it more clearly demonstrates just the According to Bigfoot enthusiasts Don Hunter opposite. The remarkably unconvincing and Rene Dahinden, the footage was shown to "creature" looked nothing like the Patterson special effects artists at Universal Studios just creature. In fact, it was obvious to everyone— weeks after it was shot. Their conclusion was: except, apparently, the producers—that it was a "We could try. But we would have to create a guy in an oversized suit. They also didn't completely new system of artificial muscles and explain why their "Bigfoot" was unable to leave find an actor who could be trained to walk like footprints in the sand that showed him to weigh that. It might be done, but we would have to say over 500 pounds, either. that it would be almost impossible." As for the claim that special effects artist It's not surprising then that today's John Chambers produced the Patterson Ellen Hartwell, Clairvoyant, Manifester, Companion for Your Journey Ellen is a clairvoyant who understands that to have we must create and to create we must think and to think we must become awake and aware. A reading with Ellen is uplifting, informative and fun!