by Miguel E. Rodriguez
DIRECTOR: Jack Arnold
CAST: Grant Williams, Randy Stuart, April Kent, William Schallert
MY RATING: 8/10
ROTTEN TOMATOMETER: 83% Certified Fresh
PLOT: After being exposed to an ominous mist, Scott Carey starts to shrink in size, baffling medical science and subjecting him to unanticipated dangers.
I appreciate the seemingly endless string of 1950s sci-fi/monster movies in the same way I appreciate the short films of Georges Méliès: I acknowledge their place in movie history and their influence on the films of today, but I have no overwhelming desire to hunt them down and watch them. If that makes me a dilettante, so be it. I remember watching some of those ‘50s films as a boy on Saturday afternoons, although the titles elude me. (One of them was in 3-D, requiring a trip to the local 7-11 to get a pair of those funky cardboard glasses.) As young as I was, I could already see that these were not exactly Hollywood’s best films. The plots were creaky and repetitive, the special effects were barely passable, the scripts were hammy and the acting even more so. The ideas behind the stories were more compelling than the movies themselves.
Imagine my surprise, then, when I sat down to watch 1957’s The Incredible Shrinking Man, directed by Jack Arnold, the man behind a few of the most famous entries in the sci-fi/horror craze at that time: It Came from Outer Space, Creature from the Black Lagoon, This Island Earth, and Tarantula. Even though Shrinking Man appears on the National Film Registry as well as the invaluable list of 1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, I was prepared to be mildly bored with cheesy effects and overwrought acting. Instead, I was genuinely thrilled by the adventures of Scott Carey, an everyman whose body inexplicably starts to shrink and shrink, until one day a housecat poses a mortal threat and a household spider – well, a tarantula – becomes as symbolic as anything from Hemingway.
A plot summary seems mildly superfluous: while boating one day with his wife, Scott Carey unwisely remains topside as a mysterious cloud of mist passes over their boat, leaving his body coated with somehow ominous glitter. Six months later, he starts to notice his clothes aren’t fitting as they should. His wife, Louise, barely has to stand on her tiptoes anymore to kiss him. Doctors are baffled, but promise to do whatever they can, spouting pseudo-scientific nonsense about phospholipids and a “deadly chemical reversal of the growth process.” There is some unintentionally (?) suggestive dialogue as Scott expresses his concerns to Louise: “I’m getting smaller, Lou. Every day.” And: “You love Scott Carey. He has a size and a shape and a way of thinking. All that’s changing now.” Not exactly Michael Crichton, but I rolled with it.
One of the things that sells the movie and the story is the ingenious production design that kicks in when Scott reaches about 36 inches in height. As he walks around his living room, everything has become larger than life. When he sits in an easy chair, his head doesn’t even reach the top of the back. A pencil is larger than a baseball bat. He despondently visits a diner, where a cup of coffee is as big around as a beer barrel. This aspect of the film seemed reminiscent of, say, a Disney movie. It seems obvious at first, but it’s done so well that I was drawn into the illusion completely. Some clever trick photography manages to put the shrunken Scott in the same frame as the full-size Louise many times. Even my experienced eyes couldn’t see the “splice” without a lot of searching.
Scott eventually shrinks to just a few inches tall and must resort to living inside a literal dollhouse, another triumph of production design. This sets up the first major set piece of the movie as their housecat sees the tiny Scott as a tiny morsel and attacks the dollhouse. Scott winds up in the cellar, Louise comes home and assumes the cat has eaten her beloved husband, and Scott, unable to climb the now-inaccessible staircase, must navigate the menacing wasteland of a dimly lit cellar in search of food and water.
This central portion of the film is what sets it apart from most other similar films of its era. The screenplay was written by Richard Matheson, based on his book. Matheson also wrote I Am Legend, and in both stories, there are long passages where a solitary character is alone with his thoughts and must solve life-or-death problems with no one to talk to. The silence of Shrinking Man during Scott’s adventure in the cellar is striking. The film started with narration, and I expected it to last throughout the cellar sequences, but the filmmakers wisely decided to keep it minimal and focus instead on Scott’s actions, allowing the audience to think along with him instead of telegraphing what he was thinking. I was reminded of Cast Away (2000), although poor Scott never gets a Wilson. Instead, he’s stuck with the resident tarantula that becomes his nemesis.
I should mention the subtext of the story, even though it’s not something that occurred to me while watching. I’m told in various documentaries that Matheson wrote his novel The Shrinking Man in 1956 during a bout of depression and insecurity as a new father. Scott’s shrinking reflected Matheson’s own sense of insignificance under the responsibilities of a father and husband in an age of accelerating technology and the fears of the Cold War. This is something that might have been far more obvious to audiences of the time than it is to a member of Generation X, but in hindsight, it’s an intriguing added level to a story that is compelling enough on its own. If I wanted to, I could connect this story with Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park with its ravenous dinosaurs paired with a warning to the scientific community about the dangers of unchecked progress. Pretty neat.
As fascinating and, at times, terrifying as the cellar sequences are, what really sets Shrinking Man apart from its contemporaries is the ending. In virtually every other ‘50s monster film, the story ends on some kind of positive resolution where the threat is removed due to some new scientific discovery or an unexpected ally (the germs in The War of the Worlds come to mind) or, like Godzilla, it just disappears into the sunset. This movie sidesteps that cliché by presenting the audience with an existential statement about the vastness of the universe on both a cosmic and an infinitesimal scale. I know that sounds dry as hell, and the final monologue flirts with hokeyness, but listen to it carefully, and the ideas in it are grand and mystifying. It mentions “God” here and there, but if you think of God, not as THE God, but as the unknowable engine of fate and/or the cosmos, the sentiments expressed have thought-provoking implications. Scott’s last words in the film may sound simplistic, but they’re loaded with meaning, and can be applied to his own situation or to anyone struggling with the meaning of their own existence. Pretty heady stuff for a sci-fi/special effects genre movie.
Where other films of its kind attempt and fail to ascribe grand themes to their kitschy stories and rubber-suited big-bads, The Incredible Shrinking Man actually made me think. That’s an accomplishment.

You said you were quick to notice bad special effects, but you did not notice any in the cat scenes?
LikeLike
First, thanks for reading!
Second, yeah, of course the cat scenes featured primitive (by today’s standards) process photography, but by then the movie had cast its spell and I was prepared to forgive the shortcomings in the FX of that day and age, which is something I definitely canNOT say about movies like Them or [insert vintage sci-fi movie reference here]. Here, the FX were at the service of the story, instead of the other way around.
LikeLike
Yeah, that’s reasonable enough.
I do appreciate the movie, but really, sometimes when the main character runs, it is obvious that he is not in the same screen with the objects.
Still, I’ve cared enough about the story to look past those details to some extent
LikeLiked by 1 person