Comments on: Why Frame 352?

By: dewhurst

dewhurst — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:10:41 +0000

I was always of the opinion that frame 352 was so popular because we get to see more of Patty’s face than in any of the other shots.

By: jamin19

jamin19 — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 04:30:22 +0000

If I were to think that possibly the PGF film was authentic, than of all of the frames of the PGF film, frame 352, is of the most memorable because it allows viewers to imagine the possiblity of a new species inhabiting this planet, which would be of the most closly related to our species than any other species. And, the subject in frame 352 shows more human traits in that frame than any other frame on the film. That is what I thought the first time I saw the film.

By: Brindle

Brindle — Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:37:34 +0000

Patty is swinging her arms in a very human like pose. Do any other critters swing there arms in very wide arcs like a human in a hurry does?

By: cryptohunter65

cryptohunter65 — Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:43:46 +0000

This side-by-side comparison gives a graphic representation of a point Grover Krantz made many times. The BBC creature is turning it’s head and looking over it’s shoulder. The Patterson creature has turned it’s whole upper body. People can turn their heads to look over their shoulder, apes can’t. We are looking back over a 40 year span and trying to prove or disprove this film. The problem is that we look at it with 40 years of technological advances imprinted in our minds. Many people say that this could be or that could be. What they forget is that while it could be know, in 1967 the technology wasn’t there. Very few of us can look at this film with our minds geared purely to 1967. I know I can’t, hell I was only two years old.

By: Stosh

Stosh — Sun, 26 Feb 2006 00:03:27 +0000

The picture next to “Patty” is my son, Stosh Jr, dressed up as Santa Bigfoot. He is showing everyone how to dance the Hokey-Pokey at our annual Halloween in June party. By the way fuzzy, the first guy in the line with you looks just like me.
Ho-Ho-Ho

By: Tube

Tube — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 22:41:30 +0000

“Notice the arms”, could also read “Notice the lack of loincloth”.

By: matty777

matty777 — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:07:17 +0000

When people try to debunk the patty film. It amazes me they do not take in account the thickness of the torso. If you look at the picture comparison, Patty is twice as thick as a human in the costume and one more thing. If you were going to make a costume, would you really make a female. look at patty walk in a frame for frame movement. obviously a female with breast. What do you think?

By: drshoop

drshoop — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:02:42 +0000

I think even without the illustration to lead us toward a speculative conclusion, frame 352 displays a classic and recognizable human form. As humans we tend to exprapolate and describe things we cannot explain into anthropomorphic terms, making them less frightening to our psyches.

By: fuzzy

fuzzy — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 09:45:38 +0000

I think I recognize that guy with the spear from somewh- oh, he looks like me!