... and take place at a table where movie and television star Peter Graves is already sitting. Graves tells them he's personally fascinated by the mysteries surrounding the notorious creatures' existence, and claims that he undertook investigations and research at his own initiative. Hilarious laughter all around the bar.
Why is the first paragraph of this user-comment written as a joke? Because this whole pseudo "documentary" IS a joke! Don't believe for even one second the makers ever had the intention to bring an objective or even remotely scientifically reliable documentary. They simply wanted to cash in on the contemporary very popular trend of bigfoot/sasquatch movies, whereas Peter Graves is just an actor who wanted to earn another easy paycheck. Admittedly, he's a very dedicated actor, because he acts visible annoyed when a so-called "scientist" arrogantly says to him that eyewitness reports of Bigfoot sightings can't be taken serious as evidence.
This thing is American and thus largely revolves around Bigfoot, or whatever you want to call him. The Monster of Loch Ness (Scotland) and Yeti the Abominable Snowman (the Himalayas) are guest stars, and the script even dares to state they are real and that local scientists have confirmed their existence. So why not Bigfoot? Well, maybe because all the eyewitnesses are too obviously random people picked from the streets that are reading their testimonies from a piece of paper held in front of the camera.
"The Mysterious Monsters" is terrible, but hilarious. I can only hope this didn't genuinely petrify too many spectators back in the early 70s. I laughed enormously at the testimony of the "faker". There's a guy who narrates how, after being called a hillbilly by monster hunters, he made Bigfoot-shaped boots in his garage and amused himself with leaving traces in the mud. Now, that I can believe!
Why is the first paragraph of this user-comment written as a joke? Because this whole pseudo "documentary" IS a joke! Don't believe for even one second the makers ever had the intention to bring an objective or even remotely scientifically reliable documentary. They simply wanted to cash in on the contemporary very popular trend of bigfoot/sasquatch movies, whereas Peter Graves is just an actor who wanted to earn another easy paycheck. Admittedly, he's a very dedicated actor, because he acts visible annoyed when a so-called "scientist" arrogantly says to him that eyewitness reports of Bigfoot sightings can't be taken serious as evidence.
This thing is American and thus largely revolves around Bigfoot, or whatever you want to call him. The Monster of Loch Ness (Scotland) and Yeti the Abominable Snowman (the Himalayas) are guest stars, and the script even dares to state they are real and that local scientists have confirmed their existence. So why not Bigfoot? Well, maybe because all the eyewitnesses are too obviously random people picked from the streets that are reading their testimonies from a piece of paper held in front of the camera.
"The Mysterious Monsters" is terrible, but hilarious. I can only hope this didn't genuinely petrify too many spectators back in the early 70s. I laughed enormously at the testimony of the "faker". There's a guy who narrates how, after being called a hillbilly by monster hunters, he made Bigfoot-shaped boots in his garage and amused himself with leaving traces in the mud. Now, that I can believe!