Typically, director Gordon here puts his mark on a popular horror theme – in this case, the shrinking of human beings (displayed in glass receptacles very similar to the ones in which Dr. Praetorius showed off his own 'little people' in James Whale's BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN [1935]!), that had seen service during the genre's heyday in both THE DEVIL-DOLL (1936) and DR. CYCLOPS (1940), and which was just reworked in Sci-Fi terms for the nuclear age in THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN (1957); incidentally, the film under review made for an inverse scenario to its director's two "Colossal Man" efforts (which I will be checking out presently). Though the end result is certainly harmless and not unentertaining, I cannot say to have been very enthused with it either. The main reason for this, apart from the obvious lack of surprise within the narrative, is the fact that, much as the film wanted to render the villain (an excellent John Hoyt) sympathetic by emphasizing the consuming loneliness that caused him to take drastic action to overcome this, I simply could not buy it – both as a believable ploy (how did he ever expect his subjects to take their 'affliction' sitting down?!) and as a fantasy element (so the size of an object caught on camera is proportional to the projector's distance from the screen…but what exact bearing does this have on the re-assembling of atoms from one place to the other?!). Another unfortunate aspect to the movie is the apparently obligatory inclusion of 'hip' teenagers…who literally dance to the tune supplied by the puppet-master, that is, until the more level-headed arrival in their fold of star and genre regular John Agar! A subplot involving Hoyt's inconveniently enthusiastic old pal Michael Mark, a more traditional manager of marionettes, and his equally insufferable theatre caretaker does not help matters. For the record, the director's daughter (Susan) makes her acting debut in this one.

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.

** minor spoilers ** Despite the fact there is really no "Attack" and the "puppets" are really people, the film is a bit of a rip-off of the more successful Incredible Shrinking Man.The plot is quick and predictable. A toymaker whose wife had left him many years ago learns how to shrink people to six inches tall. He does this so that he won't be alone. This man is Mr. Franz, played seriously by John Hoyt, a character actor whose been in all kinds of sci-fi, from the crazy rich guy in a wheelchair in "When Worlds Collide" to the doctor in the pilot episode of Star Trek.Franz keeps running out of secretaries (shrinking them and putting them in bottles is bad for business) and so he hires another one; blonde and alone like him. She falls for Bob (John Agar, whose appeared in many cheesy scifi flicks of the 50s).Bob does the right thing: he proposes marriage in a drive-in which is playing "Attack of the Colossal Man" (through an incredible coincidence this film was also directed by Bert I. Gordon, the same director as "Attack of the Puppet People.").As the police close in, Franz decides on a murder-suicide but the little people will have none of it.The plot fades, we never learn the fate of the other shrunken people and Franz stands in a lab, alone -- the worst fate! Plot holes galore: How did a toymaker, doll manufacturer and part-time puppeteer find the skills and knowledge to create an advanced scientific device that shrinks organic matter? Why did he waste this on people when he could have made a mint as a respected scientist? And what happened to the other shrunken people who escaped into the theater? You'll have to watch to find out!

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.