PG Film Hoax? Bill Munns on Capturing Bigfoot
In this episode, Brian sits down with makeup and special-effects artist, filmmaker, and longtime Patterson–Gimlin film researcher Bill Munns for a deep discussion about the enduring controversy surrounding the PGF. Drawing on decades of study and an archive of numerous scanned film copies, Munns explains how he works to separate authentic image details from artifacts introduced through duplication and degradation over time.
Munns shares that one of the key details that first compelled him to take the film seriously was the smooth continuity visible along the figure’s back and neck, something he argues would have been extraordinarily difficult, if not impossible, to achieve with 1967-era suit technology. That observation became the starting point for his long-running technical analysis of the footage.The conversation also explores the documentary Capturing Bigfoot and the heavily debated approximately 40 second clip that appears to recreate action associated with the Patterson–Gimlin film. After personally examining the physical film, Munns says he identified it as a Kodachrome II camera original bearing a 1966 manufacture date code and believes it was likely shot on a Kodak K-100.
At the same time, he emphasizes that a date code alone does not establish when the footage was actually filmed.Based on his analysis, Munns concludes that the clip is best understood as an after-the-fact replica rather than a pre-PGF rehearsal. He points to specific visual details, including what he describes as unnaturally white feet, as evidence supporting that conclusion.
Rather than asking audiences to accept one interpretation outright, he encourages careful, critical comparison of both possibilities and argues that the most important question is not chain of custody, but how the footage itself compares to the original PGF.Munns also discusses his belief that separate “ape suit” footage may have existed, which could help explain long-circulating stories about a burned suit without necessarily proving that the Patterson–Gimlin film itself was a hoax. He closes by revealing that he is currently writing a follow-up book that will further address the controversy and expand on his findings.
Email Brian
Get Our FREE Newsletter
Get Brian's Books
Leave Us A Voicemail
Visit Our Website