A short (terrible) student film from the '60s is combined with some mid-'70s (also terrible) docudrama footage about Bigfoot and the result is this classic late-night insomniacs' favorite! The "monster" featured in the original flick is NOT Bigfoot, but rather some kind of mummy thing unearthed by a bunch of stupid teenagers digging in an Indian burial ground. A lot of very (unintentionally) funny dialogue and some of the worst acting ever committed to celluloid are highlights of the '60s footage, and make this sleep-inducing film worth watching.
49 Reviews
"I know! Let's dig up a 17-year-old film-student project, add some new stuff to make it feature-length, and sell it to TV!"
soulexpress29 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This film began life in 1958 as a student-made short. It was pretty much what you would expect from such a venture: a clichéd script rife with plot holes, acting as bad as a military training film, ultra- cheap special effects, half-assed photography
. You get the idea.
Now fast-forward 17 years, when the original film was tacked on to footage from an equally bad Bigfoot docudrama and sold to TV as a 90-minute feature. The "new" film starts with a narrative about the earliest rumblings of man dating back two million or so years. Not only is it badly written, but the forced earnestness of the youthful-sounding narrator makes the scene hilarious.
Next, we cut to a 1975-era high school classroom in which the teacher is (for whatever reason) doing a unit on mythical creatures. This leads to a monologue on Bigfoot with scenes of logging. Why? Because Bigfoot was seen at logging camps in the Pacific Northwest, you silly Billy! But wait, there's more: if you enjoy drawn-out scenes of touque- topped Canadians walking through the woods, boy, are you in for a treat! And for fans of MST3K, there's even a rock- climbing segment. Once the teacher finishes babbling about the Yeti, he brings in a guest speaker to tell of an experience he had some fifteen years ago. That's when the original film kicks in.
The 1958 monster is not actually Bigfoot. It's a ridiculous-looking mummy (with fangs, and a fried egg instead of an eye) that some high school students bring back to life when they dig up a Native American burial ground. (Oops!) The mummy goes on a killing spree because . Well, that's what mummies do, right? The kids call the local sheriff, who is surprisingly quick to believe their story, and go on a manhunt for the creature. They lure it out into the open with meat scraps (don't ask), then toss gasoline on the mummy and set it on fire. It goes up like a charcoal briquette. The end.
The film has two female characters who never really do anything. They're just kind of...there. Why? Perhaps they were dating the producer and director, who knows? Also, the "scientific" explanation for the mummy's resurrection really doesn't pass muster. It has something to do with ancient herbs put into the tomb that somehow kept the mummy dormant until our heroes come along. So, does that mean the mummy was buried alive? Again, there's no way of knowing.
Somebody thought it was a good idea to pad out a 17-year-old film- club project and put it on TV. Of course, it was 1975 and drug use was pervasive. Maybe that explains it.
Now fast-forward 17 years, when the original film was tacked on to footage from an equally bad Bigfoot docudrama and sold to TV as a 90-minute feature. The "new" film starts with a narrative about the earliest rumblings of man dating back two million or so years. Not only is it badly written, but the forced earnestness of the youthful-sounding narrator makes the scene hilarious.
Next, we cut to a 1975-era high school classroom in which the teacher is (for whatever reason) doing a unit on mythical creatures. This leads to a monologue on Bigfoot with scenes of logging. Why? Because Bigfoot was seen at logging camps in the Pacific Northwest, you silly Billy! But wait, there's more: if you enjoy drawn-out scenes of touque- topped Canadians walking through the woods, boy, are you in for a treat! And for fans of MST3K, there's even a rock- climbing segment. Once the teacher finishes babbling about the Yeti, he brings in a guest speaker to tell of an experience he had some fifteen years ago. That's when the original film kicks in.
The 1958 monster is not actually Bigfoot. It's a ridiculous-looking mummy (with fangs, and a fried egg instead of an eye) that some high school students bring back to life when they dig up a Native American burial ground. (Oops!) The mummy goes on a killing spree because . Well, that's what mummies do, right? The kids call the local sheriff, who is surprisingly quick to believe their story, and go on a manhunt for the creature. They lure it out into the open with meat scraps (don't ask), then toss gasoline on the mummy and set it on fire. It goes up like a charcoal briquette. The end.
The film has two female characters who never really do anything. They're just kind of...there. Why? Perhaps they were dating the producer and director, who knows? Also, the "scientific" explanation for the mummy's resurrection really doesn't pass muster. It has something to do with ancient herbs put into the tomb that somehow kept the mummy dormant until our heroes come along. So, does that mean the mummy was buried alive? Again, there's no way of knowing.
Somebody thought it was a good idea to pad out a 17-year-old film- club project and put it on TV. Of course, it was 1975 and drug use was pervasive. Maybe that explains it.
A Sasquatch Could Have Made A Better Movie.
Flixer19578 December 2001
Warning: Spoilers
**Contains Spoilers*--as if I could spoil a film that's already so rancid!!!
I've seen some screwball movies in my time but this hybrid hash is definitely in the top Five.
It starts with a mangy-looking Bigfoot killing a caveman, followed by credits bearing a 1963 copyright date. Then it switches to a sequence (of radically different picture quality) in which a zombie attacks a woman on an isolated farm. This turns out to be a "typical Hollywood monster flick" being screened by a professor of cryptozoology for a class full of half-snoozing students with early-70s hair. The prof lectures some more about monsters, especially Bigfoot, and we get to see footage of logging operations in the Northwest. (How EXCITING!!!) Another Bigfoot, looking different than the shambling giant hairball seen earlier, stalks a couple of luckless travelers who've blundered into his territory. Then the professor introduces an older professor who previously encountered Bigfoot. Cut back to the 1963 footage, which looks like it might have been shot in Arizona or New Mexico. The older professor and some nerdy students go on a field trip, find a mummified "Bigfoot" and prepare to haul it back to civilization. The monster wakes up--which puts him ahead of the audience-- and goes on a rampage, if you can call killing one person offscreen a rampage. I won't describe the plot any more because I don't want to spoil the "brilliant" and "thrilling" ending.
If nothing else this movie should make viewers feel better about their own scholastic performance. The doofy students here are dumber than the characters in Herschell Gordon Lewis flicks and that's saying a lot. The score in the older footage is the same weird music that used to turn up in Andy Milligan's movies. It's almost as if a drunk cut up several different films in a Cuisinart and a dope fiend randomly sewed 87 minutes together afterward. The overall effect is like that of a bad fever dream, especially if you saw this on New York City's Channel 9 in the wee hours of the morning. Bad as this mess is, it would have been more dull than Earth Science class without the added footage. William Simonsen, Robert Clymire, and Ruth Ann Manella star in what remains, to date, their only claim to fame.
I've seen some screwball movies in my time but this hybrid hash is definitely in the top Five.
It starts with a mangy-looking Bigfoot killing a caveman, followed by credits bearing a 1963 copyright date. Then it switches to a sequence (of radically different picture quality) in which a zombie attacks a woman on an isolated farm. This turns out to be a "typical Hollywood monster flick" being screened by a professor of cryptozoology for a class full of half-snoozing students with early-70s hair. The prof lectures some more about monsters, especially Bigfoot, and we get to see footage of logging operations in the Northwest. (How EXCITING!!!) Another Bigfoot, looking different than the shambling giant hairball seen earlier, stalks a couple of luckless travelers who've blundered into his territory. Then the professor introduces an older professor who previously encountered Bigfoot. Cut back to the 1963 footage, which looks like it might have been shot in Arizona or New Mexico. The older professor and some nerdy students go on a field trip, find a mummified "Bigfoot" and prepare to haul it back to civilization. The monster wakes up--which puts him ahead of the audience-- and goes on a rampage, if you can call killing one person offscreen a rampage. I won't describe the plot any more because I don't want to spoil the "brilliant" and "thrilling" ending.
If nothing else this movie should make viewers feel better about their own scholastic performance. The doofy students here are dumber than the characters in Herschell Gordon Lewis flicks and that's saying a lot. The score in the older footage is the same weird music that used to turn up in Andy Milligan's movies. It's almost as if a drunk cut up several different films in a Cuisinart and a dope fiend randomly sewed 87 minutes together afterward. The overall effect is like that of a bad fever dream, especially if you saw this on New York City's Channel 9 in the wee hours of the morning. Bad as this mess is, it would have been more dull than Earth Science class without the added footage. William Simonsen, Robert Clymire, and Ruth Ann Manella star in what remains, to date, their only claim to fame.
It is simply so amazingly boring that it transcends it's own awfulness and becomes an object of perverse fascination!
EL BUNCHO5 December 2001
A long-time standard on the tri-state area's WWOR tv, my friends and I first discovered this in the late seventies, and have been hooked since. Yes, it is every bit as wretched as you have heard, but it is simply so amazingly boring that it transcends it's own awfulness and becomes an object of perverse fascination! The endless stock footage of the logging industry that is meant to give insight into where Bigfoot hangs out, the bogus paper-mache monster at the beginning, the classroom full of obviously stoned (and bored) nonactors...I could go on and on. The thing that sends the movie into the nadir of bad movie hell is the point where it clearly turns into some unfinished zero-budgeter from the early sixties that features a Bigfoot that looks like some guy who covered himself in rubber cement and rolled around on a barbershop floor! My friends and I would tell our schoolmates about this for years, and we'd constantly hear "Aw,come on! No movie could be that bad!!!" Then they'd watch it and realize just how bad a movie can be. For years THE CURSE OF BIGFOOT stood as an excruciating rite of passage for bad movie buffs in Connecticut, but sadly it hasn't been seen on local TV since spring of '87. Thank God I taped it on that last night...Now I torture my unwary new friends with it. In fact, one of them summed it up thusly: "This isn't a movie. It's an endurance test!" It's still more entertaining than RAT RACE, though! But then again, so is jock itch...
Two films in one
thejimdoherty4 October 2006
THE CURSE OF BIGFOOT and TEENAGERS BATTLE THE THING are actually two different films. From what I can make out, TEENAGERS BATTLE THE THING was made in 1958. A VHS tape was released in 1997. It's in black and white and runs 60 minutes. I don't believe this version was ever released theatrically. THE CURSE OF BIGFOOT added newly-shot footage (some of it being needless padding) to the beginning and end of the film, leaving the TBTT footage basically intact in the middle. The new introductory scenes, shot over a decade later, use one of the actors from TBTT as a guest lecturer in a high school classroom. He recounts his amazing story of his encounter with Bigfoot. The TBTT scenes are then used as a flashback. Either version of the film is fun, although the new framing footage in BIGFOOT is a hilarious plus.
Three out of 10 for some suspense. Should rate it a 2 without it.
tthegal19 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I came across this on a channel late at night, didn't see beginning.
Decided to watch it even though the details on description gave it 1 star!
All I gotta say is watch it for heck of it as it kept me curious and a little spooked! For a low budget film I'll give them credit on that.
But, really, trying to kill the thing and only a sheriff is involved with them to help! So that part there made me give it a low rating. I'm like where is more help! Then after reading other reviews, ok my new TV isn't whacked! Yes night was daytime in some scenes! Because of these aspects after having to see if there were these observations in a review I decided to give my review- I didn't see anything on just a sheriff helping out. But on night scenes, thank you other reviewers to reassure my TV was ok!
So for curiosity entertainment if you pass by it, it's worth a watch. Im sure you'll agree with all I wrote though! I'll leave it here with, really only a sheriff!
All I gotta say is watch it for heck of it as it kept me curious and a little spooked! For a low budget film I'll give them credit on that.
But, really, trying to kill the thing and only a sheriff is involved with them to help! So that part there made me give it a low rating. I'm like where is more help! Then after reading other reviews, ok my new TV isn't whacked! Yes night was daytime in some scenes! Because of these aspects after having to see if there were these observations in a review I decided to give my review- I didn't see anything on just a sheriff helping out. But on night scenes, thank you other reviewers to reassure my TV was ok!
So for curiosity entertainment if you pass by it, it's worth a watch. Im sure you'll agree with all I wrote though! I'll leave it here with, really only a sheriff!
Bigfoot on ice
sol121818 December 2008
Warning: Spoilers
(Mild Spoilers) The movie "Curse of Bigfoot" copies the earlier Bigfoot epic "Shriek of the Mutilated" with a Bigfoot hunter Norman Mason going out into the timberland country of Northern California with a troop of collage students to find the elusive man-like creature.
Were first shown a number of film clips by high school teacher Dr. Bill Wyman about what Bigfoot-or Sasquatch-is really all about in his many sighting in both North America and the Himalayans Mountains where he's called Yiti by the natives who live there. It's then that Dr. Wyman introduces us, and his students, to a disheveled looking Norman Mason who's never been the same after he and his group of collage students encountered Bigfoot some five years ago. Were told by Mason that three of his students, as well as himself, have suffered deep psychological trauma after that shocking encounter and are now under constant and intensive psychiatric care.
It's when Mason recites the story of his, and his collage students, encounter of the legendary Bigfoot that everything goes out of whack in that it isn't about Bigfoot at all! It's in fact about this unrelated 100,000 year old Indian Mummy that he discovered outside the ghost town of Ivanpah California! The Mummy came to life when it was exposed to the fresh air outside its tomb and, not having eaten in 100,000 years, started to search the countryside looking for a free, in that it didn't have any cash or credit cards, meal.
The Mummy, not Bigfoot, ends up killing, and eating, a number of people but is later lured into a trap by Mason and his students as well as local Sheriff Walt where it's set on fire and burned to a crisp. The fact that there was nothing left of the killer Indian Mummy made Mason's story a bit unbelievable in that there was no proof at all that he ever had any contact with it or it even existed. Mason's story about three of the students with him ending up institutionalized also made no sense at all in that in his recounting of his amazing story they,the students, seemed to have been totally unaffected in their encounter with the Mummy.
The film "Curse of Bigfoot" is actually two movie fused into one, like "They Saved Hitler's Brain", being made some 17 years apart. The original film the 1958 unreleased "Teenagers Battle the Thing" had of course nothing at all to do with Bigfoot but the aforementioned Indian Mummy. The footage added on with Dr. Wyman was more or less an attempt to make the Mummy into a Bigfoot which turned out, after watching it, to be a complete and total failure.
The most interesting thing about the film, far more than its depiction of Bigfoot, is that it has actor Ken Kloepfer in both the spliced together movies, some 17 years apart, playing the same role of Norman Mason!
Were first shown a number of film clips by high school teacher Dr. Bill Wyman about what Bigfoot-or Sasquatch-is really all about in his many sighting in both North America and the Himalayans Mountains where he's called Yiti by the natives who live there. It's then that Dr. Wyman introduces us, and his students, to a disheveled looking Norman Mason who's never been the same after he and his group of collage students encountered Bigfoot some five years ago. Were told by Mason that three of his students, as well as himself, have suffered deep psychological trauma after that shocking encounter and are now under constant and intensive psychiatric care.
It's when Mason recites the story of his, and his collage students, encounter of the legendary Bigfoot that everything goes out of whack in that it isn't about Bigfoot at all! It's in fact about this unrelated 100,000 year old Indian Mummy that he discovered outside the ghost town of Ivanpah California! The Mummy came to life when it was exposed to the fresh air outside its tomb and, not having eaten in 100,000 years, started to search the countryside looking for a free, in that it didn't have any cash or credit cards, meal.
The Mummy, not Bigfoot, ends up killing, and eating, a number of people but is later lured into a trap by Mason and his students as well as local Sheriff Walt where it's set on fire and burned to a crisp. The fact that there was nothing left of the killer Indian Mummy made Mason's story a bit unbelievable in that there was no proof at all that he ever had any contact with it or it even existed. Mason's story about three of the students with him ending up institutionalized also made no sense at all in that in his recounting of his amazing story they,the students, seemed to have been totally unaffected in their encounter with the Mummy.
The film "Curse of Bigfoot" is actually two movie fused into one, like "They Saved Hitler's Brain", being made some 17 years apart. The original film the 1958 unreleased "Teenagers Battle the Thing" had of course nothing at all to do with Bigfoot but the aforementioned Indian Mummy. The footage added on with Dr. Wyman was more or less an attempt to make the Mummy into a Bigfoot which turned out, after watching it, to be a complete and total failure.
The most interesting thing about the film, far more than its depiction of Bigfoot, is that it has actor Ken Kloepfer in both the spliced together movies, some 17 years apart, playing the same role of Norman Mason!
Having trouble sleeping? Here's the answer to your problem.
BA_Harrison28 May 2016
Really good Sasquatch/Yeti movies are rarer than the legendary creatures themselves, Abominable (2006) being the only one I've seen that I would happily recommend to fellow horror fans (although 1980 gore-fest Night of the Demon is entertaining trash for those who enjoy a hefty dose of schlock). Up until today, I had The Legend of Bigfoot (1976) down as the worst example of the genre, but The Curse of Bigfoot is even more execrable—a dreadfully dull mish-mash of scenes from an old '50s flick clumsily edited together with newer footage from the '70s.
The film sees a group of teenage archaeology students discover the body of a mummified creature sealed in a cave for hundreds of thousands of years. The creature turns out to have been laying dormant for all that time, and wakes from its slumber to kill, leaving the students and local cops to try and lure the beast into the open so that they can set it on fire. With very little monster action, but lots of interminably dreary chit-chat and horribly wooden acting throughout, The Curse of Bigfoot makes other mediocre missing-link monster films like Shriek of the Mutilated (1974), The Werewolf and the Yeti (1975) and Snowbeast (1977) look like works of genius by comparison.
The film sees a group of teenage archaeology students discover the body of a mummified creature sealed in a cave for hundreds of thousands of years. The creature turns out to have been laying dormant for all that time, and wakes from its slumber to kill, leaving the students and local cops to try and lure the beast into the open so that they can set it on fire. With very little monster action, but lots of interminably dreary chit-chat and horribly wooden acting throughout, The Curse of Bigfoot makes other mediocre missing-link monster films like Shriek of the Mutilated (1974), The Werewolf and the Yeti (1975) and Snowbeast (1977) look like works of genius by comparison.
okay monster flick
ksf-231 March 2019
The Fields brothers... aka the "Flocker" brothers... Dave directed this thing, while james wrote the script. odd use of close-ups and wide shots. the "Team" goes rock climbing, and looks for the habitat of bigfoot. Ken Kloepler is "norman", who leads the team up the granite boulders. pretty lame all around. a mezza horror flick from the mid 1970s. story and acting are pretty inane, but we actually DO se the monster in this one, which was unusual for the time. filmed at vasquez rocks, north-east of Los Angeles. it's okay. not as bad as the ratings would indicate on imdb. lampooned on rifftrax. the summary says 59 minutes, but the version i saw was 1 hour 28 minutes. not so bad.
How to Watch Curse of Bigfoot
sandy-3177619 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Okay I know I rated it "1", but that's only for quality. For entertainment, it's easily 8+.
Here is what to do with this hidden gem of a movie. First, watch it yourself, with someone else. WARNING: DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE ALONE. Once you realize just how terrible awful no-good very bad this thing is, you are now prepared to do it justice.
Find a group of friends. Don't tell them much about the movie. Sit back with popcorn, soda, and a free evening ahead of you. Begin watching. Now, since YOU have already seen Curse of Bigfoot you don't need to watch it closely again. Instead, watch your friends, who are fresh Curse of Bigfoot "virgins". This is the show that you will be entertained by.
Watch your friends go through the stages of grief.
First, of course Shock as they are amazed by the endless inept prologues.
Second, Denial that any movie could be so terrible. Surely they won't show the dog drink the ENTIRE bowl of milk? Why would they? Why ARE they?! Argh.
Third: Anger - with luck they'll direct the anger at the film-makers, not you. What a sham they'll think.
Fourth: Bargaining - Hey, your friends ask, "Can we see Big Trouble in Little China instead? Or Troll 2? Or ANYTHING else? I'll pay for the pizza? I'll buy you a six-pack?" Don't give in. Force them to suffer through Curse of Bigfoot, all the way.
Fifth: Depression - this won't last too long. They'll sit there glumly staring at the film's idiocy, but then the film will do something REALLY idiotic and spur them back into action.,
Six: Acceptance: This is it. It's not getting better. Point out it ends in an awesome fizzle of a bang. Remind them that we were promised at the movie's start that several of the college kids were permanently institutionalized. Ask your friends which of the kids they think were institutionalized.
To rub it in, you can point out that there is neither a Curse nor a Bigfoot in the movie. If anyone is still grouchy, make a brief trip to the backyard, then return and give Mr. Grumpy some "genuine native American prayer sticks" (if you've seen the movie, you'll know).
But by now, your friends are part of the cult. When they look at you with reproach, tell them that now they can show Curse of Bigfoot to some new unsuspecting victims, and they should perk up a lot.
This is a movie that everyone should see, because it sets the bar. The lower bar, that is. Literally everything you see after Curse of Bigfoot will be better-written, better-filmed, and better-acted. But not more entertaining.
Better than Twilight.
Here is what to do with this hidden gem of a movie. First, watch it yourself, with someone else. WARNING: DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE ALONE. Once you realize just how terrible awful no-good very bad this thing is, you are now prepared to do it justice.
Find a group of friends. Don't tell them much about the movie. Sit back with popcorn, soda, and a free evening ahead of you. Begin watching. Now, since YOU have already seen Curse of Bigfoot you don't need to watch it closely again. Instead, watch your friends, who are fresh Curse of Bigfoot "virgins". This is the show that you will be entertained by.
Watch your friends go through the stages of grief.
First, of course Shock as they are amazed by the endless inept prologues.
Second, Denial that any movie could be so terrible. Surely they won't show the dog drink the ENTIRE bowl of milk? Why would they? Why ARE they?! Argh.
Third: Anger - with luck they'll direct the anger at the film-makers, not you. What a sham they'll think.
Fourth: Bargaining - Hey, your friends ask, "Can we see Big Trouble in Little China instead? Or Troll 2? Or ANYTHING else? I'll pay for the pizza? I'll buy you a six-pack?" Don't give in. Force them to suffer through Curse of Bigfoot, all the way.
Fifth: Depression - this won't last too long. They'll sit there glumly staring at the film's idiocy, but then the film will do something REALLY idiotic and spur them back into action.,
Six: Acceptance: This is it. It's not getting better. Point out it ends in an awesome fizzle of a bang. Remind them that we were promised at the movie's start that several of the college kids were permanently institutionalized. Ask your friends which of the kids they think were institutionalized.
To rub it in, you can point out that there is neither a Curse nor a Bigfoot in the movie. If anyone is still grouchy, make a brief trip to the backyard, then return and give Mr. Grumpy some "genuine native American prayer sticks" (if you've seen the movie, you'll know).
But by now, your friends are part of the cult. When they look at you with reproach, tell them that now they can show Curse of Bigfoot to some new unsuspecting victims, and they should perk up a lot.
This is a movie that everyone should see, because it sets the bar. The lower bar, that is. Literally everything you see after Curse of Bigfoot will be better-written, better-filmed, and better-acted. But not more entertaining.
Better than Twilight.
Amount of footage showing an actual Bigfoot: grand total of three minutes
vegaslover14 April 2020
"Curse of the Bigfoot: Or So You Want to Reconsider Becoming an Archaeologist" The Rifftrax comedians put it very succinctly: "This movie has more padding than a middle school locker room." The soundtrack has a very heavy responsibility, trying to create cinematic tension out of scenes of mind-numbing tedium; namely extended footage of people walking at a snail's pace, flatbed vehicles meandering through the countryside slower than a one-legged man hopping backwards, and people failing to make climbing rocks at a shallow incline look like a Herculean task. The only time anybody gets mauled in what is supposedly a horror movie, it all happens off-screen. This movie is punctuated by scenes of a teacher desperately trying to make cryptozoology sound fascinating to an uninterested high school class, and a guest speaker trying to pad his monotonous speech by using so many theatrical dramatic pauses, it would make William Shatner and Christopher Walken fall asleep. Also, it seems all B-rated monster movies portray experienced scientists as grizzled war veterans who snap at naive people like they have PTSD from their years gazing through microscopes and staring at mummies. Do all archaeologists carbon date the age of artifacts by simply looking at them, or just this dude? And the wooden acting? Rifftrax told it better here, too: "Sounds like a bunch of people being forced to act while their families are being held hostage." Oh, and there's an extended documentary of the logging industry for some barely-related reason. And was buying bottled soda back in the '50s seriously THAT complicated?
classic bad movie
rlewicke22 January 2005
If you are a fan of drive-in movies, bad movies, camp, then then this movie is a MUST for your collection! This used to be shown on the Saturday Creature Features quite often and it must be seen to be believed. Plan 9 from Outer Space is Citizen Kane next to this film; it has it all: wooden acting, long long stretches of the "actors" walking through the forest (accompanied by a thrilling music score, as if something interesting is actually happening), a perfectly inane bigfoot costume, hilarious dialog. This was released in 1976 with new footage attached to an apparently older movie (mid 60's?)concerning some archaeological students disturbing an ancient desert tomb. They discover a mummy that comes to life as a bigfoot sort of creature! What is simply amazing is that they brought one of the actors from the older movie back to appear in the newer footage!! To this day my family jokes about having the urge for a bottle of pop!
A Delightful Compilation of Horror Cues
dmahar17 March 2008
Having grown up in Connecticut like a previous reviewer, I also underwent the late night initiation of this fun, campy "Curse of Bigfoot" film during the late 70s, "...over two million years ago...", so it seems.
And since then, "in the place of things", I've always held a perverse fascination with this humble little effort, perhaps now more so due to the classroom featured in the added 70s footage, culturally bearing striking resemblance to my classrooms during that era ( though the kids of the '63 footage looked like students appearing throughout my older siblings' yearbooks). It's an unusual and unique compilation, made interesting by the fact that an actor in the '63 footage was called again to appear in the newer footage 10-11 years later. Not even "They Saved Hitler's Brain", employing the same technique of combining old with new footage, had as much continuity and heart.
I respectfully digress with previous reviewers which regard "The Curse of Bigfoot" (a.k.a. Teenagers vs. the Thing") as displaying absolutely "no talent" behind its production! The compilation and blending of stock, Valentino production music used throughout the '63 footage is actually quite remarkable! A number of distinctive cues also appeared throughout other science fiction/horror films of the late 50s/early 60s era ("The Blob", "Terror from the Year 5000", etc.). But with "Curse of Bigfoot", in keeping with the southwestern setting of the story, the soundtrack editor's mix of "horror"/"suspense"/ "Indian"/"Prairie" cues is fantastic, and coordinated well with the action and scenery on the screen.
I wonder...I wonder ("young man!"), if this script used for the '63 footage, had originally began as a script for a radio program, and not designed by "some, - demented madman!" I strongly suspect the producers' main, prior experience was with radio shows. Anyone could follow this tale when only listening to it without actually watching it. It becomes an old time radio show.
Gosh, I could sure go for a bottle of pop. And a new deluxe edition of this classic film, cleaned, restored and released onto DVD.
And since then, "in the place of things", I've always held a perverse fascination with this humble little effort, perhaps now more so due to the classroom featured in the added 70s footage, culturally bearing striking resemblance to my classrooms during that era ( though the kids of the '63 footage looked like students appearing throughout my older siblings' yearbooks). It's an unusual and unique compilation, made interesting by the fact that an actor in the '63 footage was called again to appear in the newer footage 10-11 years later. Not even "They Saved Hitler's Brain", employing the same technique of combining old with new footage, had as much continuity and heart.
I respectfully digress with previous reviewers which regard "The Curse of Bigfoot" (a.k.a. Teenagers vs. the Thing") as displaying absolutely "no talent" behind its production! The compilation and blending of stock, Valentino production music used throughout the '63 footage is actually quite remarkable! A number of distinctive cues also appeared throughout other science fiction/horror films of the late 50s/early 60s era ("The Blob", "Terror from the Year 5000", etc.). But with "Curse of Bigfoot", in keeping with the southwestern setting of the story, the soundtrack editor's mix of "horror"/"suspense"/ "Indian"/"Prairie" cues is fantastic, and coordinated well with the action and scenery on the screen.
I wonder...I wonder ("young man!"), if this script used for the '63 footage, had originally began as a script for a radio program, and not designed by "some, - demented madman!" I strongly suspect the producers' main, prior experience was with radio shows. Anyone could follow this tale when only listening to it without actually watching it. It becomes an old time radio show.
Gosh, I could sure go for a bottle of pop. And a new deluxe edition of this classic film, cleaned, restored and released onto DVD.
You have to have real talent to make a movie this bad...
Barebower15 September 2020
I can only sit here and wonder at what the people who appeared in this 'movie' are doing these days and whether they ever forgive themselves for participating in this festival of rancid vomit?
Wiith that said...you've gotta watch it...it's one of the purest forms of rubbish I have ever seen...
Fun Bigfoot shenanigans for the late-night crowd.
roddmatsui19 February 2004
No, they don't show this one on late-night TV anymore, and it's a crying shame. If you can track a copy of this one down, buy it! Pay as much as anyone asks. Sell anything you own! No Bigfoot film enthusiast should miss this. It's better than "Night of the Demon."
One of the very worst of all the Bigfoot films, this one is a lot of fun--if it's your kind of thing. It was, as noted elsewhere, made in two sections, and is unique in that it features one main character who appears younger in the 60's footage, and older in the 70's footage. No aging makeup was necessary! The actor aged all by himself!
The Bigfoot costume appears to be made out of hair with a certain amount of twigs, nuts, and berries mixed in--it kind of resembles a heap of leaves someone has raked into a pile. Observe the ingenuity at work when the Bigfoot is set on fire--someone stuffed the suit full of newspapers or something, stuck it on a stake hammered into the ground, and attached wires to the arms, so that they could wave the arms about as the creature catches fire. And I'm sure they squirted a whole can of lighter fluid on the thing before they lit it, because it really flares up nicely. It appears to be smiling as it falls apart. Forget CG effects; trust me, this is cooler than anything!
One of my favorite scenes has the kids having a LONG discussion about how much change everyone gets back after bottles of soda, referred to as `pop,' are bought. It's all in the details--in this case, the profuse and unnecessary details. If you like movies as bad as you can get them, this one is for you.
One of the very worst of all the Bigfoot films, this one is a lot of fun--if it's your kind of thing. It was, as noted elsewhere, made in two sections, and is unique in that it features one main character who appears younger in the 60's footage, and older in the 70's footage. No aging makeup was necessary! The actor aged all by himself!
The Bigfoot costume appears to be made out of hair with a certain amount of twigs, nuts, and berries mixed in--it kind of resembles a heap of leaves someone has raked into a pile. Observe the ingenuity at work when the Bigfoot is set on fire--someone stuffed the suit full of newspapers or something, stuck it on a stake hammered into the ground, and attached wires to the arms, so that they could wave the arms about as the creature catches fire. And I'm sure they squirted a whole can of lighter fluid on the thing before they lit it, because it really flares up nicely. It appears to be smiling as it falls apart. Forget CG effects; trust me, this is cooler than anything!
One of my favorite scenes has the kids having a LONG discussion about how much change everyone gets back after bottles of soda, referred to as `pop,' are bought. It's all in the details--in this case, the profuse and unnecessary details. If you like movies as bad as you can get them, this one is for you.
Probably plays in rotation in the fiery pits of hell.
b_kite31 August 2018
Warning: Spoilers
So this thing really has a strange past and future with its production. It was shot in 1958 as "Teenagers Battle the Thing" which was a 59 minute movie that was never released. However in the mid-'70s the dates range from 1975-1978 depending on were you look, the director Dave Flocker dug up his old movie shot about 30 minutes of new footage most of it during the beginning of the film and released it as "The Curse of Bigfoot" to more then likely cash in on the success of the "Boggy Creek" movies. It's nothing but 87 minutes of boring tedious mess, that will cure insomnia in a heart beat. Both the new and old footage is terrible, with a monster in a paper mache mask (that isn't bigfoot) showing up every once in awhile other then that its just people walking threw the woods while our professor character narrates most of it for us. Both the original 1958 movie and the new "Curse of Bigfoot" version seem to be in the public domain, so there both available on youtube, but you've been warned!.
A hoot for bad movie lovers
Leofwine_draca8 February 2019
Warning: Spoilers
THE CURSE OF BIGFOOT is a laughably inept movie released to cash in on the short-living Bigfoot craze of the 1970s. The crazy thing about it is that it started life as a Z-grade flick from the 1950s called TEENAGERS BATTLE THE THING, an indie so poor it's enjoyable as a so-bad-it's-good kind of picture. An expedition into an old cave uncovers a mummified creature, which soon returns to life and goes on the rampage. Inevitably the quality on this one is absolutely awful, with dubbed-sounding dialogue and grainy picture; there's little action here but a lot of padding. Bad movie lovers will find it a hoot.
Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater presented this 'trick' on Halloween 1976
kevinolzak19 November 2011
Those Chiller Theater fans in Pittsburgh who stayed up for the special triple (as opposed to the usual double) feature on October 30 1976 were highly entertained by both "House of Frankenstein" and "House of Dracula." Ah, but the real Halloween 'trick' was this rickety home movie, shown in between the two Universal classics, which actually saw two repeat airings over the next 6 years (Aug 2 1980 and Jan 23 1982). With its classroom instructor discussing the shark in "Jaws," some of it at least appeared to be new, but by the time the flashbacks began, I noticed the late 50s vintage cars on display, and slowly began to realize that someone had decided to take an unreleasable 59 minute turkey of uncertain origin, add 29 minutes of 'new' footage, resulting in a full length feature that was truly a difficult sit. All I can say is that Larry Buchanan's Azaleas look like beloved works of art in comparison. The first half hour, set in a classroom, is interrupted by interminable stock footage of logging (!) and a slow crawl through the woods after a Bigfoot wannabe, seen for all of 10 seconds. Once the flashback begins, relating the original "Teenagers Battle the Thing," it fails to improve. By the time the excavation unearths an ancient mummy, it doesn't start walking until the last 23 minutes out of the 88 total, and is glimpsed for about 90 seconds (if that sounds like fun, be my guest). Bad movie buffs may find some entertainment value here, with no actual relation to Bigfoot (topical only during the 70s), I just hope that the updated version and additional footage did help the filmmakers turn a profit, since it has proved to be, in a sense, unforgettable, though for all the wrong reasons (just getting it shown must have been an achievement in itself).
"A piece of wood"
robbyimdb3 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
OK.......it's sometime during the middle of the movie when you finally get a good look at the "scary" monster.....the bad music plays "da-daaaaa" as the camera zooms in on the monster. And to give you an idea of what this monster looked like I have to quote my Dad... he said "What's that? A piece of wood?" That sums up this horribly bad movie. But it's an absolute MUST SEE for people who love to heckle.
The incredibly bad film, bad music and unbelievably bad acting is what makes this film the worst made piece of crap ever!! And how about the fact that the monster is supposed to be over 7' tall yet when he's fighting the 5'5" sheriff he's the same size! I could go on, but you need to see this thing for yourself to truly appreciate bad movie making.
The incredibly bad film, bad music and unbelievably bad acting is what makes this film the worst made piece of crap ever!! And how about the fact that the monster is supposed to be over 7' tall yet when he's fighting the 5'5" sheriff he's the same size! I could go on, but you need to see this thing for yourself to truly appreciate bad movie making.
Accursed bilge
Woodyanders23 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Representing the ugly, filthy, unwashed hind end of Sasquatch cinema, this dreadful direct-to-TV hodgepodge profoundly reeks more than the allegedly malodorous mythical monster. A little boy and his yippy dog are attacked by Bigfoot in the opening scene; this occurrence is never tied in with the rest of the flick. Next a pompous high school science teacher gives an interminable lecture about the origins and discovery of Bigfoot to his understandably disinterested class. An intense guy shows up to relate a grim story about his own nasty run-in with Sasquatch. Several years ago the intense guy was a high school teacher who with a coed student quintet in tow ventured into the wilderness to check out an ancient Indian burial ground. The expedition finds a mountain and climbs it. They uncover Sasquatch's secret subterranean tomb. They enter the tomb and run across a perfectly preserved mummified corpse. They remove the corpse, which turns out to be Bigfoot (!), from the tomb. Bigfoot awakens from his centuries of sleep and goes on the rampage. Man, is this patchwork muddle one beat movie. Don Fields' static direction sorely lacks both finesse and energy, the performances are terribly wooden, the narration is very annoying (Bigfoot is described as "a monster of evolution"), the pace lurches along at an excruciatingly sluggish clip, the story uses a confusing and disjointed flashback-ridden narrative structure with mind-deadening results, the cinematography offers a wealth of appalling mismatchings of footage shot in two separate eras, the cornball bellowing score sounds like it was lifted from some Grade Z 50's schlock creature feature, the faded color film stock is pure torture on the eyes, a stupefying surplus of extraneous filler abounds, the supposedly exciting climax is simply pitiful (Sasquatch gets torched in a small brush fire), and the Bigfoot is a real letdown -- he's some short heavy-stepping schmo in a ragged bush league hair suit with a pop-eyed, inexpressive paper mache mask on his face! The absolute pits.
Curse of Bigfoot
Dwylbtzle23 July 2006
User Comments: No talent, no direction, no rehearsing, no editing, no kidding (more)
they forgot no story no action no plot NO GOOD!
well, I've finally found it: the WORST movie ever made by far nothing else I've ever seen comes even remotely close
this movie is obscenely shamelessly insanely BAD!
The most hilarious thing about it is: twenty minutes OR MORE can go by where people are just climbing rocks or walking in lemon groves and the symphonic music sound-track rises and falls and rises to another climactic crescendo as if the most intense dramatic suspenseful action footage ever rendered is playing out on yer screen
BUT IT ISN'T BELIEVE ME
AS HOURS OF FOOTAGE OF BUSHES--OR PEOPLE WALKING... GO BY--THE SOUNDTRACK IS TRYING TO SAY "Suspense!--MIND WRENCHING, BUTT-CLENCHING Suspense!") :
stupidest dialog stupidest ending ever
I highly recommend it THIS you gotta see before you die (which event you will be longing for about five minutes in)
yes--paper mache' granny wig monster costume
with YES a ping pong ball with a hole in it as one of the eyes
and as soon as the monster sees a human he HAS to kill you
which he seems to accomplish by throwing his arms out to the side and falling on you
truly truly truly bad movie, folks
One of the funniest things (I thought):
they find an engraved stone--about two by two feet flat on the ground
they pry it up and there's a cave opening under it
so they get a rope and go down
and now it's a twenty by twenty foot opening
no explanation whatsoever
they forgot no story no action no plot NO GOOD!
well, I've finally found it: the WORST movie ever made by far nothing else I've ever seen comes even remotely close
this movie is obscenely shamelessly insanely BAD!
The most hilarious thing about it is: twenty minutes OR MORE can go by where people are just climbing rocks or walking in lemon groves and the symphonic music sound-track rises and falls and rises to another climactic crescendo as if the most intense dramatic suspenseful action footage ever rendered is playing out on yer screen
BUT IT ISN'T BELIEVE ME
AS HOURS OF FOOTAGE OF BUSHES--OR PEOPLE WALKING... GO BY--THE SOUNDTRACK IS TRYING TO SAY "Suspense!--MIND WRENCHING, BUTT-CLENCHING Suspense!") :
stupidest dialog stupidest ending ever
I highly recommend it THIS you gotta see before you die (which event you will be longing for about five minutes in)
yes--paper mache' granny wig monster costume
with YES a ping pong ball with a hole in it as one of the eyes
and as soon as the monster sees a human he HAS to kill you
which he seems to accomplish by throwing his arms out to the side and falling on you
truly truly truly bad movie, folks
One of the funniest things (I thought):
they find an engraved stone--about two by two feet flat on the ground
they pry it up and there's a cave opening under it
so they get a rope and go down
and now it's a twenty by twenty foot opening
no explanation whatsoever
A mummy. Not Bigfoot. A mummy.
BandSAboutMovies20 September 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This movie lies to you from the very moment it begins. First off, it's barely a movie, clicking in around 59 minutes. And when you get to the real heart of the movie, it's not even about Bigfoot! It's really about a mummy coming back from the dead.
A high school biology class - filled with stoners - spends much of the opening of the movie discussing cryptozoological creatures like the griffin. What school is this? Who approved this lesson plan? Nonetheless, this class is interrupted by a good friend of their teacher, who frighteningly warns that he took his class to search for Bigfoot 15 years ago, a field trip where parents bemoaned signing the permission slips, as nearly everyone involved ended up in mental institution.
That's when we cut to footage of a completely different movie - a student film made in 1958 called Teenagers Battle the Thing - where that class travels to Native American burial ground where a mummy attacks the kids.
This is a movie that redefines the phrase bad movie. It has it all - B roll travelogue footage, amateurish acting from two different decades, day for night footage that's explained away by the moon being so bright and a climax that explains that the only way to stop Bigfoot is to set him on fire. Even better, the print I watched was completely blobbed out and orange. This is not a movie that demands a blu ray or 4K transfer. It belongs beaten up and hard to watch.
A high school biology class - filled with stoners - spends much of the opening of the movie discussing cryptozoological creatures like the griffin. What school is this? Who approved this lesson plan? Nonetheless, this class is interrupted by a good friend of their teacher, who frighteningly warns that he took his class to search for Bigfoot 15 years ago, a field trip where parents bemoaned signing the permission slips, as nearly everyone involved ended up in mental institution.
That's when we cut to footage of a completely different movie - a student film made in 1958 called Teenagers Battle the Thing - where that class travels to Native American burial ground where a mummy attacks the kids.
This is a movie that redefines the phrase bad movie. It has it all - B roll travelogue footage, amateurish acting from two different decades, day for night footage that's explained away by the moon being so bright and a climax that explains that the only way to stop Bigfoot is to set him on fire. Even better, the print I watched was completely blobbed out and orange. This is not a movie that demands a blu ray or 4K transfer. It belongs beaten up and hard to watch.
Truly a Curse
schultzalan-16 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I must admit I had never seen this movie before and was expecting a movie that was so mind numbingly awful that you couldn't help but enjoy it. Instead, what I got was this. A movie that starts out as cheesy fun but ends up excruciatingly dull with the tedium only relieved by the hilariously bad monster effects. Unfortunately, this film is nowhere near as much fun as its so bad it's good reputation suggests. You see this film was originally made back in 1959 as "Teenagers Battle the Thing". It was re-released in 1976 with new footage under it's current title. It starts out well with a typically entertainingly kitschy early 70's ripoff/pastiche of "Night of the Living Dead" and Bigfoot movies involving a Bigfoot zombie(!), a hippie teen, and his hilariously confused dog. In fact, the dog looks so confused, he seems to be pleading for the director to give him some sort of command so that he can get an idea of what his motivation is supposed to be. As it comes to an entertainingly silly end, this vignette is revealed to be a Hollywood movie being screened by a High School Mythology teacher (!)and his students, who seem to be incredibly stoned. The teacher goes on to discuss supposed real-life encounters with Bigfoot leading to the obligatory reenactment scenes that were so common in 1970s b- movie docudramas. This does provide some low-brow entertainment value. However, the film quickly goes downhill once the teacher introduces a former colleague of his who has had a traumatic experience with the creature thus bridging the new footage with that of the 1959 movie. The movie thus begins to turn into something of a snooze-fest as we travel back to the remembrances of the elder colleague. It's never a good sign when the newer footage is vastly more entertaining than the older footage, guys. But, that's what we get here as the movie morphs into a completely different film about the colleague and his archaeologist students discovering an ancient mummy and accidentally bringing it back to life. Only the colleague and the hilariously awful creature costume remain the same. In fact, the only entertaining moments in the second half come from the truly terrible creature costume and the overripe acting by much of the amateur cast. This is because the director literally kills the film with his leaden pacing and ham-fisted technique. It leaves you with more yawns than yucks. Which is sad. Because, if this film had more energy, it could have been up there with "Plan 9". Entertainingly bad, but entertaining nonetheless,
Uniquely different, it's two films in one.
Year28896 May 2003
At some point in about 1962 a film was made which revolved around the misadventures of a group of high schoolers on a weekend field trip to Pahrump, Nevada searching for Indian artifacts. What they find is terror at the hands of an ancient mummy. Badly acted and shot poorly this film resembled a made-for-students travelogue. It moldered over the years as it sat unwatched and unappreciated in some vault somewhere. And then, like the Pahrump mummy it rose to terrorize us all again.
It would appear that the director of the previous footage asked the main player from that film to appear in the new film as his old character being asked to tell modern (70s) kids about his experiences with "The Great Man-Beast of North America," which he reluctantly does. The older film is used in its entirety as a flashback vehicle to the supposed Bigfoot encounter. But, of course the creature isn't a Bigfoot at all, it's just an Indian mummy.
This is a bizarre melange. Just for fun, check out the end of the film where all the students are standing around the bonfire, and note that they are all pretty much acting normally, then remember the words of Roger Mason, that, one of those students will have to spend the rest of her life in a mental institution!
Long live paper mache monsters!!
It would appear that the director of the previous footage asked the main player from that film to appear in the new film as his old character being asked to tell modern (70s) kids about his experiences with "The Great Man-Beast of North America," which he reluctantly does. The older film is used in its entirety as a flashback vehicle to the supposed Bigfoot encounter. But, of course the creature isn't a Bigfoot at all, it's just an Indian mummy.
This is a bizarre melange. Just for fun, check out the end of the film where all the students are standing around the bonfire, and note that they are all pretty much acting normally, then remember the words of Roger Mason, that, one of those students will have to spend the rest of her life in a mental institution!
Long live paper mache monsters!!
The highlight of the film was that film with the dog!
Aaron13756 April 2020
This movie was apparently an older film spliced with some new footage in an attempt to extend the older films run time. That is at least what it seems as this thing was a complete and utter mess as we get a film with a woman being attacked as her dog watches on, a classroom of students, another film with lots of logging and two dudes going after Bigfoot and then the film with a bunch of kids going on an archaeological trip that constitutes the majority of the film and it never bothers to wrap up the movie by flashing back to the classroom.
The story is all over the place as it starts with a teacher showing his students a horror film and then lecturing them on Bigfoot. He has a guest speaker who then tells the students about his trip that apparently sent two of the students to a mental hospital. Then we see this play out in very slow moving fashion as they find a cave, enter cave and take out mummy who turns out to be a monster!
This is a television film, so I am guessing the new footage was added to increase the movie's length so that it would run in a two hour time slot. They did manage to score one of the original actors from the film this movie gets most of its footage from as he tells the story. Like I said, the movie was most interesting when showing a monster stumble through the woods and attack a woman and that is not saying much.
So, this film has very little going for it. Just a mashup of various things thrown together in an attempt to make a longer feature film as in the 70's films with a running time of under an hour were beginning to go out of style. There is not much of a curse to this one and I just have to wonder, how did the horror they face send two of the students to the mental hospital? Seriously, the only one who was attacked at the end was the sheriff and he didn't die!
The story is all over the place as it starts with a teacher showing his students a horror film and then lecturing them on Bigfoot. He has a guest speaker who then tells the students about his trip that apparently sent two of the students to a mental hospital. Then we see this play out in very slow moving fashion as they find a cave, enter cave and take out mummy who turns out to be a monster!
This is a television film, so I am guessing the new footage was added to increase the movie's length so that it would run in a two hour time slot. They did manage to score one of the original actors from the film this movie gets most of its footage from as he tells the story. Like I said, the movie was most interesting when showing a monster stumble through the woods and attack a woman and that is not saying much.
So, this film has very little going for it. Just a mashup of various things thrown together in an attempt to make a longer feature film as in the 70's films with a running time of under an hour were beginning to go out of style. There is not much of a curse to this one and I just have to wonder, how did the horror they face send two of the students to the mental hospital? Seriously, the only one who was attacked at the end was the sheriff and he didn't die!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
