Perry Kate Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Diagonaldi Very well executed

Lawbolisted Powerful

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

flapdoodle64 Bert I. Gordon (BIG) stands out as one of the more successful grade-Z auteurs of 1950's films, having made within a few short years a slew of monster/scifi ultra low budget films, all of which involve fantastical changes in the size of people or animals. BIG never made films as good or subversive as Roger Corman, but BIG made a lot of super-cheap films in a short time that made money, provided employment for actors, and provided material for drive-in theaters.Most of the BIG films involve people or animals that become giants, but this one involves a mad toy-maker who shrinks people so as to fulfill some kind of weird personal fetish. There is a crisis point about 2/3 way through this film where Mad Scientist Hoyt decides he must kill his shrunken pets...there is a hint of genuine horror at this point, and I was reminded of the real-life horror the Andrea Yates case, herself guilty of infanticide and simulatanously a victim of both poor mental health and fundamentalist religion. BIG borrows heavily here, from sources as wide-ranging as the Bride of Frankenstein to The Incredible Shrinking Man, as his visuals go. As far as BIG's patented FX techniques go, this is one of his more refined pieces, along with War of the Collosil Beast.Eternally geriatric John Hoyt, who was good in 'When Worlds Collide' and as Gene Roddenberry's original choice for the doctor of the starship Enterprise, plays the mad villain, and does a fine job of it. Hoyt's performance holds the film together, and despite the mad scientist schtick, he is ultimately more engaging than John Agar, to whom I have assigned the title World's Most Unlikable Actor.This is standard, mid-grade BIG fare, which is to say, an enjoyable waste of time for those who enjoy Drive-In era films. The story is not terribly complicated, and I think BIG padded things out so that this film would have sufficient running time for theatrical release, otherwise it could have been done as an episode of the Twilight Zone.BIG made this film for peanuts. Ten years after its release, TV schlockmeister Irwin Allen tweaked the concept slightly, and made the series 'Land of the Giants,' which at the time was the most expensive TV show ever produced, and ultimately much more tiresome than this quaint artifact.

Lee Eisenberg Bert I. Gordon (aka BIG) was known for his ridiculous but enjoyable movies. "Attack of the Puppet People" is a prime example. It's about a doll maker (John Hoyt) who is actually shrinking humans down to the size of dolls and keeping them. So, his secretary (June Kenney) becomes the latest victim. It's a pretty fun movie. In fact, there's a scene that I'm surprised got past the censors (you'll know it when you see it).Yes, the title and poster are both misleading (the dog only appears for about a minute), but the point of the movie is to have fun, and it succeeds, and even has a cool dance scene. As it was, I read that this movie played a role in Watergate: the person who was supposed to be keeping a lookout was watching "AotPP" and wouldn't tear himself away from it. I don't know if that story is true, but if it is, then he must have been savoring that one scene that I mentioned. That scene, for lack of a better description, is truly a PIECE OF HEAVEN! Anyway, really fun.PS: John Agar was Shirley Temple's first husband.

StuOz For decades I knew of an old film called - Attack Of The Puppet People - but I had no knowledge of what it was all about and I could not get my hands on a copy to find out: not until December 2010.I thought I had seen all the old Hollywood sci-fi films about "little people" in a giant land and to my surprise I find this little gem of a movie. Fans of Irwin Allen's Land Of The Giants (1968) series must see this film. Many ideas and action scenes from Land Of The Giants were taken from this film. In fact, it is almost a little depressing to discover that Land Of The Giants was less original than I always thought it was.Yes, in this movie we have a group of attractive "little" men and women who talk to each other, laugh with each other, climb down giant tables, get chased by giant wild animals, deal with fantastic hardware, deal with an oddball "giant" (John Hoyt)...just like the Land Of The Giants cast would later do in the 1960s and early 1970s.Land Of The Giants did it with better music scores (by John Williams, Richard LaSalle, etc) and a bigger budget but Attack Of The Puppet People did it first. This is a must see movie!

MartinHafer This is the case of a horror film whose title is much better than the film. So much of the title is wrong--a much better name would have been "Doll People Who Mostly Just Sit Around...and Stuff"! There is nothing at all resembling an attack and the people are shrunk to the size of Barbie dolls and are NOT puppets in any sense. But think about how creepy and wonderful it would have been if puppets really did come to life and have a reign of terror!! What an opportunity wasted.The film is about a creepy and lonely man (John Hoyt) who sells dolls but also turns people into his own special living dolls. The dolls are kept drugged and in suspended animation in plastic tubes and he takes them out occasionally to amuse himself because his life really sucks. It's hard to be horrified by the guy--he's more just some old creepster who is rather pathetic. And, eventually when the living dolls (at least two of them) are able to restore themselves to their original size, the film just ends! There is no real resolution or satisfaction--just an ending that leaves the viewer wondering why they gave up on the movie towards the finale (such as it was).The biggest problem with the film is the super-limp script. There is nothing particularly interesting about it other than the main plot idea--no chills, no excitement,...nothing. The scale of the doll people also often changes--showing that the film was rushed into theaters before it could all be worked out well. About the only interesting thing about the film is seeing two very familiar TV actors of the age in non-traditional roles (John Hoyt, who seems to have done practically every sort of role over the years and Hank Patterson, who played 'Fred Zipfel' on "Green Acres"). Otherwise, it's a dud.