“There’s a squatch in these woods.”
Well, no, it’s probably a bear or a squirrel or something, but hey – whatever gets you a TV show, right?
Animal Planet is full of winners these days – see my March 11 post about Mermaids – and you’ll understand what I mean. But “Finding Bigfoot” is a piece of art, all its own. It follows three men (founder Matt Moneymaker, researchers James “Bobo” Fay and Cliff Barackman), and one woman (resident skeptical scientist Ranae Holland) as they search the wilds of North America for proof of the enigmatic creature dubbed Bigfoot. Although on this show, the name Sasquatch has degenerated to “Squatch.”
This is one of those shows where there’s never actually any evidence, but you keep watching in the hopes that something will happen. There are plenty of interviews with “eyewitnesses” attempting to communicate the nature of their encounter, as well as the various recreations utilizing computer generated images.
A lot of the people that are interviewed tend to be hunters, so one would assume that they know the difference between the regular wildlife and a cryptid like Bigfoot. But then again, you’d also think that scientists would be willing to entertain the possibility that these Bigfoot sightings are simply misidentified bears or deer or even other hunters.
That’s where the problem sets in.
The cast of “Finding Bigfoot” are solely reliant on their belief that any noise, any picture, any shred of evidence points to the absolute fact that Bigfoot exists. I can recall one time I watched, hearing one of the guys say, “You’d have to be stupid to think it was a bear.” Or something along those lines. I mean, even the skeptic will spout Bigfoot belief after a little while. Although I will say this for Holland, she will call out a person if their interview seems a little odd.
I suppose something can be said for a person who is so passionate about their beliefs that they can go on TV and not be wayed by others. But for me, that’s kind of a turn-off. I’m an open-minded person, as I think most people are today, so to hear someone refuse to believe anything other than what they believe does not draw me in.
At the same time, though, it’s a funny show because you watch and see various pieces of “evidence” and think, “wow, that’s a bear” or even, “that was totally another hunter.” You just know that they’re wrong more than half the time and that kind of makes it fun.
So, does “Finding Bigfoot” sink or swim? For me, total sink. I’m not a fan of close-minded people and shows that never yield useful evidence just aren’t worth it to me. Below I’ve embedded a clip from the show so that you can come to your own conclusions. Take a peek, watch an episode, let me know what you think.
(I just want to note, though, that I’m not knocking anyone’s personal beliefs here. I’m picking fun at this particular show, not at people who believe in Bigfoot or anything similar.)