Bigfoot caught on tape challenge with the crew needs to happen. I want to see Niko and Sam's effect shots of a non-humananoid Bigfoot creature. Make it happen guys
theres footage that went around around a marine biology boards back in like the early 2000's of an unknown sea animal, not a single scientist could identify it and the person that shot it and posted the footage was a marine biologist too. I beleive i saw the footage talked about on trey the explainer's page.
@@kerzytibok3211 Yeah and they called it a him even though she clearly has breasts, lol. If they didn't point out the breasts, then they barely analyzed these videos and only made assumptions.
Consider that the original Bigfoot video was captured in 1960s and makes me wonder that why it looks much more realistic than a Hollywood movie whether it’s a costume or Cgi
@@360.Tapestry Oh 100%. Even people who Know where it came from will go around posting it claiming it's real just for internet clout/attention/memes. Guarantee you it'll constantly get posted on places like tiktok where people pass it off as real just for views.
The interesting part is that Adam and the Corridor guys would give it their best shot and still fall short of the '67 Patterson film --- then they would admit it's a real Bigfoot !!
What impresses me most about the Patterson footage is that all the attempts to re-create it have looked SO BAD. If it's fake, Patterson and Gimlin were better special effects men than anyone who has made a Bigfoot-related Hollywood movie. IMO Jurassic Park was the point at which movie effects caught up. Regarding the gait, the late physical anthropologist Grover Krantz identified some really significant differences with humans. For example, most humans spend 95% of their walking stride with one foot or the other on the ground; Patty has both feet on the ground for 20% of the stride. Humans tend to fully lock their knees at certain points, whereas Patty's knees are notably bent at all times. Closest parallel I can think of is the way SWAT teams move when they're trying not to make audible footsteps. It's not an impossible gait for a human, but it's not the default one either by any means. If you walk like that on the sidewalk you'll look WEIRD. I'm glad you guys brought up Planet of the Apes, because the head costume designer for that movie said he and his team would not be able to produce the Patterson footage. In particular he cited the movement of muscles under the fur, which get hidden by a suit. He said the hoax would require a person of that build, with fur glued to his body. And as far as the dude who claimed to be in the suit? There have been like 6 guys who took credit for that. It's a really quick and easy way to get yourself on the local news.
Yup. There have been a few clowns who claimed to have been the guy in the suit. They couldn’t even take anyone to the filming location. What stumps me about the film is this: let’s say it was a hoax. Let’s say a couple of nearly broke rodeo cowboys came up with a suit, in 1967, that was decades ahead of what the best Hollywood artists could make. And they made the suit a female with large breasts-because, hey, why not make it more complicated than it needed to be? Then they travel deep into the woods on horseback with their accomplice (again, no credible one has ever come forward)… and then shoot just a few seconds of shaky footage. It kind of beggars belief. If they were able to make a costume that good, they could have made far more money in the movie business than they ever did off the supposed hoax. And if someone else made it? No one has ever come forward with a convincing example of the costume. For me it’s easier to believe that Bigfoot exists and Patterson and Gimlin happened to catch a few seconds of shaky footage of one than to believe the preposterous things I’d have to believe to think it was a hoax.
So you find it more believable that a creature could survive for hundreds of thousands of years in almost complete secrecy, with no one EVER finding a dead one or providing any convincing evidence in the year 2024, than some guys being able to rig a Bigfoot costume in the 1960s? Yeah okay. Besides that, John Landis said the costume was created by professional special effects people to fool Patterson. No one has ever accused Patterson of faking the costume himself. Bigfoot believers are no different than Loch Ness Monster hunters or the UFO community. No one ever has any convincing evidence. Just decade after decade of blurry, shaky footage and "I saw something or know a guy who saw something".
And to add one more fun detail: I would point to the head as being the most difficult part of this costume to replicate. If you look closely at it, you notice that the head doesn't have human proportions. In fact, the forehead looks like it gets smaller up top, which is impossible for costumes to do. Especially back then. Costumes can only add, they can't subtract.
I laughed when you mentioned adding weight to things when filming because one thing my fiancé and I always call out in movies or shows are people carrying coffee cups that are CLEARLY empty…it’s so obvious, like just put water or something in them! Lol
One trick is to use jello!! Mix up jello in a cup. It solidifies and wont spill or splash around but it still has the same weight as if it were coffee !! Safer to use on set because less likely to spill on equipment or costumes
I know I’m not the first to suggest this but Corridor should definitely attempt to make the most convincing Bigfoot footage with practical and visual effects. Now whether the attempt is released anonymously or not is another thing to think about
if i had that kind of VFX knowledge and skill i would definitely make videos like that and upload them on a throwaway reddit account just to mess with people
This is actually a terrible idea for anyone invested in keeping Sasquatch as a joke or myth. What would happen is they would try to do their own fakery it would immediately be torn apart by experts all the while giving the PG footage more validity. It’s like the pyramids we couldn’t replicate it if we tried.
“I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry, and that's extra scary to me. There's a large, out-of-focus monster roaming the countryside. ” - Mitch Hedberg
Not only is bigfoot blurry but when bigfoot walks, every step it takes makes the earth shake which leads to shaky camera so before blaming the camera man, blame bigfoot.
They were just so disappointed at the quality they were presented with, it was barely an effort for them. At least some of the ufo and ghost videos presented some sort of challenge.
@@kerzytibok3211 they found that original footage the most convincing compared to everything else. That’s a very different thing from being mostly convinced it’s real.
Ya u just gotta get your shins cut, steal the fat suit from the big momma movies, stop by the planet of the apes set, learn how to rock down to electric boogorilladoo. Then you just challenge your camera guy shots, because your gonna look so real he might try to shoot you without the camera!
I want to see a "Can the Debunkers be Debunked" series. Let Sam and Niko create some footage and do their SFX magic without anyone else at CC knowing. Then have the footage sent anonymously to Corridor. It doesn't have to be bigfoot either- well I want like 5 or 6 of these, so Bigfoot at some point.
I live in Australia and I've lived in the bush for 30 years. 10 years ago when I went for a walk I saw a bigfoot walk across the trail I was on. It was 9 or 10ft tall. It looked at me as it stepped across the trail and it just kept walking through. I shit myself then turned around and walked home. After my experience I looked into the subject and I realised there were thousands of sightings all around the world. I came to the conclusion that every single person is lying or there is actually something out there. I don't believe that thousands of people around the world are lying.
Mic Dodge, a famous woodsman in Washington state, is known for dressing up in a homemade beaver pelt bigfoot costume and trolling bigfoot hunters in the forests up there. He's been doing it for decades. The Discovery channel had a series about him for a while and they filmed him doing it one night. The hoots and howls he would do are almost a perfect match for some the so-called bigfoot recordings. He took trolling to a whole new level.
Are there people doing the same in the nahanni valley, Northwest Territories? Are they taking people and carrying them up a 1000 ft rock face? People, children, have been found in these impossible to reach places.
Explaining how body proportions, gait, inertia, and environmental adaptation all play a role in how a creature walks was legitimately fascinating. I never thought to debunk Bigfoot clips in that way.
Fun fact, the Patterson film is the single most analyzed piece of footage ever filmed, with the exception of the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination.
Yes, analyzed, but never successfully debunked by anyone (including this video) Edit: I find it problematic that the Patterson-Gimlin film has been SO excessively analyzed and yet not explained away, and yet videos like hyper-simplistic, even dismissive reviews such as this one by the Corridor Crew can be accepted outright. The outcome is not educational nor is it scientific.
Basically made this comment in more length earlier, but you couldn’t even make a skin tight “ape suit” on your own in 1967, and NO one made something like that, that you could just go buy.
@@hamilcar682 Precisely. Though the mastermind behind the costuming for the original Planet of the Apes film was credited by many in Hollywood for making the “ape suit” in the Patterson-Gimlin film, he himself never actually said that he made it. Loren Coleman’s discussion of the history behind all this was I think eye-opening and nuanced. So glad that people like you are making comments on these kinds of RU-vid videos. I was displeased to see so many comments supporting the video uncritically.
To me what immediately indicates the Patterson Footage is fake is the glutes are stiff and don't flex as the "Creature" walks. Seems like the guy was wearing some armor that ends by the butt line under the furry suit.
A few thoughts: it's not that common to shoot a large animal and have it drop dead on the spot. Even a good lung shot often sees the animal run some distance before it collapses. Then you would have to track its blood trail to find it. And finding anything dead that is camouflaged for its environment can be very difficult. Having listened to a lot of alleged first hand accounts from hunters on Sasquatch Chronicles, I can offer a few more possible insights- 1) many witnesses say that resemble humans to an extent where it gives them pause before firing. Is it a guy in a suit? Is it a prank? It's said their eyes look very human-like. 2) Most hunters are hunting deer and aren't carrying serious firepower. If you have an ~8ft. creature and you have .270winchester rifle or even a .44mag sidearm, you don't really have stopping power for that animal. 3) There is a theory that they have the ability to emit infrasound capable of subduing humans. Many alleged witnesses claim that their roar freezes you, blanks your mind or otherwise effects the nervous system so that you can't act. Many also say they are left with a residual malaise or morbidity often for several days after that may be an after effect of infrasonic attack.
@@evan_stadler dude, good elk bull doesn’t weigh much less than that. A good moose will be 1000 plus, you can definetely shoot something that big and have a reasonable chance of it collapsing instantly. People absolutely would’ve shot at least one by now.
@@shmekelfreckles8157 yes but it's believed by many that there's typically more than just the one you see so if that's true who knows how many of the 1000s of peaple that go missing every year did shoot and maybe kill one but didn't live to tell the tail since they didn't realize they were out numbered. I'm not saying these things are 100% real but the amount of evidence there is you can't just say "well we haven't killed one so can't be real" that's super arrogant. Not to mention the countless peaple who have seen these things and have permanently changed by the experience. Just open your eyes a little do some research before making bold and arrogant decisions.
In 1976, I attended a lecture by a man named Bob Hieronimous on the history of the Great Seal of the U.S. Many years later, he claimed he was the person wearing the saquatch suit in that first video. He said a friend hired him to play the role but never paid him. You can look him up and read his version of the story.
His story is full of holes. He didn't have a similar gait, didn't have similar proportions and the guy that "offered him 1k" was a retired rodeo showman that was so poor he was taking out loans to pay his bills.
I just want to say that this show has helped me a lot with understanding movies better. I'm young, and I normally just enjoy the movie because it is a fun movie, but now after watching all of your videos, I have a new perspective on the movies I watch. Thank you
Be careful! Anyone can say ANYTHING! Just as much as these guys claiming that they're able to detect a costume when they clearly can't. Sorry, but I trust an expert with a PhD who said the original film could not be a costume with VERY good reasoning for why over these college dudes, sitting and chillin, mocking, and who have NEVER EVER left the comfort of their indoor plumbing and delivery pizza. Probably drunk and drinking while filling this?! Be more skeptical just as much as these guys are skeptical. They're simply incorrect about SOME of their criticisms and they are legit in others. But remember, ANYONE can say ANYTHING! just like me! So becareful of what you believe.
I love that this is a video basically informing people how to make better Bigfoot footage and I love it! I really hope we get some better stuff out there. AND YES PLEASE DO water creatures! they're creepy AF
better videos? wtf this people actually think that u just ge out u phone and as fast u get a foot on video? even get a bear on video on the wilderness is not that commun get a foot is 1 in a million
@@Mrpizzas664 I kinda thought that. Just so you know you said beer🍺 which is a drink and I think you meant deer, the animal 🦌 in case you want to edit it!!
exactly, plus their take apart was of a revamped piece of footage. Anyone who has seen the original can see this one is altered already. They probably did it so they could make the jokes and "debunk' it. This is why you have to leave you mommy's basemen now and then.
To debunk that people would be afraid to be that close, you should watch some footage of all the people that get too close to Bison and any other animal at Yellowstone. While most people have common sense there are a lot that don't
The creature in the Patterson Gimlin footage has noticeably longer arms than a human. Also, no person I've ever met walks like that. Its knee thrusts upwards with each stride.
@@steec6713 Not now. Not with anywhere near that fluidity during a continuous walk. Heironimous clearly has regularly proportioned, long human legs and corresponding torso. Patty has the opposite, but I guess if 3 smug millennials say it's fake, then I suppose we just need to accept it 😂🤣🤣😂
Costumes in 1967 were not that good. Look at Planet of the Apes. Humans do not lift the legs to a 90 degree bend when they walk. But, I would actually agree the other films were hoax’s
@@MrSup350 I admit that the feet seem a little questionable but what do we have in terms of a "real" scientific model to compare it to? How do we know what they would look like? Jeff Meldrum says the casts taken that day are convincing. Do these guys even know who Meldrum is?
I'd love if two of the guys secretly made their own footage (practical or CGI) and sneak it into their compilation. Then they pretend they believe it and see what the third guy says!
@@dsbmitchell One reason is that Patterson wrote a book called Do abominable snowman of North America exist??? He drew Patty in it with breast and all.....Two years before he flim her?
@@elsapoelsapo1821 Thanks for your comment. Yes, I am aware of that. While I can understand some people using this as cause for concern, it doesn’t particularly bother me. Researchers and scientists generate hypotheses all the time that they will find such and such data to support this or that theory, and quite often they actually end up turning up just such evidence that goes against a null hypothesis. As a scientist myself, I am well aware of this. I don’t see much difference in what happened with the Patterson film. Moreover, if these hairy hominids exist, compose a breeding population, and one of them was captured on film, there is more than a small likelihood that the subject filmed would be a female since females as well as males are in fact needed to sustain such a breeding population. In all, I see no problem with the fact that the subject was a female or bore similarity to some of Patterson’s previous work (which was itself similar to another popular reported sighting). I think interested investigators should focus on the subject in the film itself (its anatomy, biomechanics, etc.) rather than the person behind the film, and allow that evidence to speak for itself. Edit/Update: I now have a copy of Patterson’s book, and the majority of the drawings in the book are of male Sasquatch-not female ones. So there does not seem to be any indication that he had some sort of pre-conceived plan to specifically film a female Sasquatch.
@@dsbmitchell Most people don't know the background of the hoax. Roger was making a movie, where he and his bigfoot buddies were going to hunt down bigfoot. Bob Heironimus and his brother Howard starred in it too, along with Bob Gimlin as an Indian tracker. Roger ended up dumping the project as he couldn't get the further funding from his wealthy brother in law Al DeAtley so he sold the film as a real life encounter instead. Roger's co-worker Janos Prohaska, in working with ANE built the costume. The head piece used was a taurean head created by Wah Chang. It was common practice, and still is, to put together parts of different costumes to make "new" ones.
When the Patterson film was the first to pop up, it was a bit disappointing that they didn’t look into it as far as other researchers have. Being such an old video and considered the best, it’s been used and looked at a lot.
Yea and they said the proportions were human when there clearly not. Aswell as they just keep saying it's a guy in a suit for like every video. Disappointed in this video as well
@@evan_stadler ya there's muscle movement under the fur, it's clearly female which is an odd choice for a costume and it's gait is not human. They can't make that as a costume right now let alone back then. Those planet of the apes costume look goofy in comparison. The guy who claimed he faked it had no proof, it was simply his word. This was a lazy effort to debunk and I honestly expected better.
@@XxDemon23xX Did I say it was real? I laid out reasons that the footage is more compelling than they let on. That to you equals I am required to film the legendary animal personally? Does this strike you as a logical response?
I want to see the corridor crew make their own cryptid footage with their own original monster! Though it would need a big watermark in the corner saying "THIS IS FAKE" or else it would be shared a million times on facebook lol also deep sea creature episode yes!
In reference to sea monsters: its hard to imagine scarier animals than 23' Whites or crocs, not to mention giant squid. Authentic creatures are enough to amaze me.
Right at the end, Sam said exactly what I was about to comment. The old OG footage looks more convincing than anything else that has ever been presented as a Bigfoot on camera. Nothing even comes close, and that's so disappointing. I'm not saying 100% that it's an impossibility that there could be something out there, but no video has ever come close to convincing me. The most realistic Bigfoot that's ever been filmed is Hary from Hary and the Hendersons. That costume was some of Stan Winston's best work. The hair and the expressive face were amazingly well done and very natural looking. I honestly don't think anybody will ever get as good as that. Can't wait to see the oceanic cryptid debunk video.
The Corridor guys didn't want to admit it in this video --- but the way they were looking at the Patterson film at the end convinces them it's not a hoax but a real creature!
now that I'm seeing it enhanced, the first footage in the compilation that is the most recognizable just looks like some guy walking around in a gorilla suit.
I could be wrong but the left footage at 6:19 looks like it could be their studio, meaning they have a Bigfoot suit and might be filming something like this soon
There's been some interesting analysis of the Patterson/Gimlin film that purport to show the creature is outside human body shape in terms of length/proportions/movement of the body structures. Might deserve a deeper dive. 🤟✌
They already put Bob Heironimus side by side it is human shaped and it has his gait. They already explained that. It must have went right over your head.
@@USBionicMarine Whats goin over your head is you can clearly see muscle mass movement. Explain how that can happen from a suit . No man-made suit even came close to that in 1967.
Yeah, half the things they said would make it more convincing when playing the ape clips were actually in the Patterson film. Long limbs, flexing muscles in places that aren’t anatomically correct for humans. Not saying it’s real but if it’s a hoax it’s very impressive. They also say the gait looks human when it famously isn’t, any primate biologist will tell you that’s not a natural way for a human to walk. Again, not saying it’s real, but if it isn’t not, it’s a lucky or brilliant hoax, not an obvious one.
It's a primate....doesn't mean sorta human. It's like they explained with the weight and build and everything different with a gorilla compared to a human
Bigfoot believers say that “it’s impossible to walk bending your knees at an almost 90 degrees angle” and yet the guy in the stock footage next to Patty perfectly does it lol
The thing with the Paterson footage is if you get a clean copy you can see the muscles moving under the skin. We can do that today with costumes not in 1967. Also if they would take the time and measure the arms and legs are out of proportion to standard human anatomy. Not saying its real but I thought they'd take more time on it and put in the effort to properly address the footage. As my dad would say not mad just disappointed. :)
The proportions and walking of a bi-pedal ape should be expected to be more similar to the other bi-pedal apes than it would be to the quadrupedal apes. We have shorter arms because we don't use them as legs. We have longer legs because we walk upright. The same would be true for bigfoots. If bigfoot is real as described by legend then it absolutely should look more like a human than it looks like a gorilla. Like they should compare to humans the same way that gorillas compare to chimps. A chimp in a gorilla suit would look way more like a gorilla than any human in a gorilla suit ever could.
Paterson and Gimlin both estimated the height of the creature they saw to be about 6 foot 5 inches, and not taller. That would be about the height of Bob Heironymous wearing a costume. Yet, over time the bigfoot keeps growing and growing, until he's over 8 feet tall.
They never said 6'5 they said 7.4 they didn't say what you said I don't know where you got that from but no that's not true and a lot of people estimated the height was about when you measured with the trees and everything from the ground it's about 7 ft 4 and that's what they're trying to say and plus why would be someone being a female version of a Bigfoot if they're a guy that wouldn't even make any logical sense that would be kind of stupid I mean who would have thought of that to be in a female costume a version of a Bigfoot does that make any sense to you if they're a male? I think not.
@@AnthonyDerrico-d8g "Patterson initially estimated its height at 6 feet 6 inches (1.98 m) to 7 feet (2.1 m), and later raised his estimate to about 7 feet 6 inches (2.29 m). Some later analysts, anthropologist Grover Krantz among them, have suggested Patterson's later estimate was about 1 foot (0.30 m) too tall. Gimlin's estimate was 6 feet (1.8 m)." - Patterson & Murphy, p.195
With concerns to the Patterson footage, it’s Been reviewed by both costume designers and biologists and both have said that what the corridor crew said is not possible
the muscle movement is human-like and it isn't impossible for a human to walk like that. but that being said, it isn't difficult for a human to replicate the gate of an ape. half of terry notary's career is the replication of apes. i think to come to a conclussion of wether or not the p/g footage is real or not kind of ruins the americana whimsy of it. i think people should just enjoy it for what it is, not what it might be.
How is it not possible tho? It moves like a human, they even found the dude who walked exactly the same way, and there have been much more impressive costumes in film. And its so blurry that you don't even get a good look at the costume.
@@LordWout It's certainly possible to mimic the walk, sure. Honestly though, why would anyone expect a bipedal ape to be notably taller than a human or walk in a substantially different manner? "Bipedal ape has similar height limitations and gait to other bipedal ape".
CGI guys- Suit looks great. Stan Winston and Rick Baker...the 2 best to ever creature effects guys. Winston- "It's a guy in a bad hair suit" Baker- "It looked like cheap fake fur"
One issue: Nico assumed the Patterson-Gimlin creature has "normal proportions." It does not. Anthropologists have measured the limb ratios and they don't match humans. Basically the arms are too long and the tibia is too short, and that is very hard to fake practically. You can easily make legs longer, but not shorter (we can't move our knees around). Another fact worth considering, it was shot at the very END of a reel of film. The first part was full of B-roll from them riding around the forest for days. Which means if you assume it's fake, they had ONE TAKE to get this footage. Consider the difficulty of getting a very large man and very advanced, expensive suit (for 1967) deep into the California wilderness, and then getting a perfect first take, no stumbles or slips of any kind in the bulky suit. I'm not convinced either way but it's interesting
The most compelling videos I’ve seen were one in Russia where the proportions were Gibbon like and the “Bigfoot” was leaping while running, and another where a figure single handed throws a tree like a spear.
They didn't. They're college dudes. Likely drinking and laughing at these videos but have NO credentials. They're like food critics. Or movie critics. They're just commenting so people like YOU will watch and belive them. Again! Anyone can say anything! So be very skeptical or what people tell you! Becareful of anyone who says, "bigfoot is real!" AND becareful of people who say "bigfoot I'd NOT real!!!' Always be skeptical of rhe extremists!!! The middle way is the best way
Somehow nobody, from the creators of the original Planet of the Apes (released around the same time as the PG Film, with a much higher Hollywood budget) to the CG masters in Hollywood today, has not been able to replicate Patty. Nobody has ever recreated it to show us just how "fake" and "impossible" it is for Patty to be real. Even Stan Winston called the PG film a fake, yet the master of special creature effects never created a creature as realistic and life-like as Patty. Skeptics talk shit about the PG film any time there's a conversation about Sasquatch, yet they can never replicate it to prove how "fake" and "easy" it would be to do. Almost sixty years on and nobody has been able to do it. Edit: Also, Bigfoot hasn't been around for "60-70 years" you guys. Native Americans have reported 'big hairy men' centuries before both Europeans *and* Native Americans even knew gorillas existed. Did the Native Americans secretly know gorillas and other apes existed and wanted to troll each other for clout? Occam's razor that you cited would suggest otherwise.
Yea the Patterson footage is not to be glossed over like in this vid. The arms hang below the waist. Gotta say that guys walk was so similar, but alas that suit was way more robust and stocky
We were in a tent 5000 ft up in the Rockies. Couldn't sleep, my buddy gave me a Sasquatch book. Every noise outside freaked me out. Next morning found out they could not have been Bigfoot cuz it was grizzlies. 45 years on scares the hell out of me
Thank you Corridor Crew!!! Huge fan here can't believe you did this! Totally made my day! 🤩 "Always believe in yourself, even when nobody else does" - bigfoot 👣😁
I think the intriguing part is that the Corridor guys would give it a good try and then realize the 1967 Patterson film is authentic and it's actually a real Bigfoot !!
@@kerzytibok3211 100%. So dismissive of it. Bob Hieronymus, the guy they’re convinced was in the suit, couldn’t reproduce it. Also, his walk and body proportions do not match the footage. These guys are either really ignorant or just don’t care enough to really study it.
@@BlackGuardXIII Most people don’t know anything about the Paterson footage beyond the confessions of Bob and the other guy who claimed to have made the suit. The average person likely googles “Paterson Bigfoot” and stops looking into it beyond Wikipedia, and you can’t really blame them. Most news sources act like it’s a very cut and dry closed case, so people go into it with that assumption.
@@CrazyLikeUhFox 100%! These guys are just continuing to spread this uninformed and ignorant narrative, giving it the support of supposed experts. Personally, I like the far more intelligent and in depth analysis of someone like ThinkerThunker.
This is a pretty poor low effort video imo, some of the fooage shown has been proven or admitted to be fake, others like the Patterson Gimlin video at the start were far too easily dismissed, I have seen analysis on other channels of that footage where you can see toes on the feet, its limbs don't quite match a humans and also its a female Bigfoot, they keep referring to it as he/him. Would it have hurt to do some background research on the videos shown? The whole video shows very little depth of analysis and is half-arsed compared to their other debunking vids, it seems so unprofessional.
With today’s technology and everyone have a very good camera in their back pocket, its only a matter of time till we finally get a good quality picture of that costume.
You should make a challenge where everyone gets to create the most believable big foot sighting footage. The most believable one would be crowned the winner.