SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

tthegal 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!

kevin olzak 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).

sol1218 (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!

barneyo My brother and I also enjoyed making fun of how bad this film was back when channel 9 showed it every two months or so in the mid to late seventies. Remember the incredible delivery of the girl talking to her dog, reminiscent of that "What? Sandwiches again?" commercial about learning to drive a tractor-trailer? I mainly recall the moment when they pull the plate covering the ancient tomb off and gas spurts out, with the leader of the expedition a full thirty seconds later surmising that the gas might be coming from a hole. I wonder if that scene was in any way an inspiration for Steven Spielberg in the equivalent scene in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when ... never mind.