Patrick Stewart's Height
5ft 8in (173 cm)
Peak height was 5ft 9in (175 cm)
British actor best known for his portrayal of Captain Jean Luc Picard on the Sci-Fi series Star Trek: The Next Generation and it's subsequent movie spin-offs. In addition, he has appeared in films such as X-Men and Conspiracy Theory. He lists himself as standing 5ft 10 on his resume, although from the few times I've seen him in person at conventions, he has appeared - at age 70 - nearer the 5ft 8 mark.
You May Be Interested
Add a Comment 111 comments
Average Guess (3 Votes)
Peak: 5ft 9.17in, Current: 5ft 8.08in
Brandon said on 22/Sep/16
@Wipeout, that is for the most part accurate but at the same time height loss is different for everyone. He wasn't 5'10" peak.
Wipeout said on 25/Aug/16
A little rule of thumb for you guys:
You lose your first inch completely between ages of 55 and 60. Then you lose an additional inch every 15 years thereafter. So if Patrick Stewart is 5'8 at 70, he has already lost about 2 inches. He was therefore at or near 5'10 between the ages of 18 and 50.
said on 30/Jul/16
so when exactly did he start being 5'8?
Editor Rob: late 60's maybe
saw him said on 21/Jul/16
Saw him today. He looked in the 5´8´´ range to me.
Mr t said on 20/Jul/16
He is definitely 5.10 as there's a picture with him standing next to my cousin who's 5.10 only taken yesterday
Mr t said on 20/Jul/16
He is definitely 5.10 as there's a picture with him standing next to my cousin who's 5.10 only taken yesterday
Mr t said on 20/Jul/16
Definitely 5.10 as there's a picture with him standing next to my cousin who's 5.10 and there about the same
Johno said on 7/Apr/16
As Rob listed him, 5'8.
said on 6/Apr/16
Rob, do you think Stewart's pointy head might make him a bit taller than one would think?
Editor Rob: his eyelevel at times could look 4.7-4.9 range, so a fraction more than average because of head shape. It might make him look a little smaller to people.
Steve said on 23/Mar/16
He definitely doesn't look any taller than Gates McFadden when he stands facing her in the first season of Star Trek
Brian said on 21/Dec/15
After watching Robin Hood MIT, I thought he was at least 6'. He looks taller than he really is then.
Fruit said on 2/Dec/15
Check out any scene where he's out of his Captain's boots.
Holodeck scenes with shoes or slippers, it's obvious Spiner was at least an inch taller.
said on 29/Nov/15
He's well proportioned. I think in his prime, he was 5'10". When compared with Brent Spiner, who is listeded on here as 5'10", Patrick is consistently the same height as Brent. I think the volume of Brent's (Data's) hair made him appear taller on TNG. Now-a-days, 5'8.5" – 5'9.5", considering his age. Check out the link below with him and Brent in the early TNG era:
What would you say Rob?
Editor Rob: I've seen stewart up close a few years ago, he really isn't taller than myself. On Next Gen he could look 5ft 9 range though
Key said on 4/Jul/15
He's always claimed 5'10, and every website ive seen lists his height has 5'10. But I kid you not, EVERY single time I watch this guy act in movies, he ALWAYS looked 5'8. It's so weird. :/
Ananymous said on 28/Jun/15
During the TNG era, Stewart was already in his late 40s, and eventually in his early 50s during the show's 7 season duration. This being said, he probably lost a little height (no more than a centimetre) at that point in time. He consistently looked to be around the same height as Brent Spiner, who is around 5'10" himself. Patrick looks to be a very average man. 5'10" peak in his younger days, and nowadays around 5'8" – 5'9", considering his advanced age. What do you think, Rob?
said on 10/Apr/15
Wish you could get a photo, though he's probably expensive...
Still can't believe Nimoy is gone. I hope you get a chance to get on of the Trek captains, I know it's morbid, but mortality limits those opportunities...
[Editor Rob: I did but it was one time he sat, unfortunately at another event he stood and I couldn't go, but I seen him up close. He really isn't much different than myself.]
Justanotherguy said on 23/Dec/14
I don't know what his height is today but on TNG he easily looks at least 5'9. Maybe he wore lifts.
What? said on 21/Jul/14
My favourite part of this website is laughing at a load of **** who make people smaller than they should be. Let's be honest... NONE of you know better than the very honest dude who owns the site. So chill.
j said on 9/Dec/13
I've stood near him in an airport and I'm 5'11" and I'd be surprised if he's even 5'8", I'd say 5'6"
Len said on 28/Aug/13
He's always looked 5'8", even 20 years ago on ST: TNG. I don't think he's lost much, if any, height.
I also see that he's doing the standard Hollywood thing of claiming to be 2 inches taller than he really is.
Kase-D said on 4/May/13
If Kingsley is 172cm Stewart has to be at least 174 or even 175..
diavolo said on 4/May/13
All Star Trek: TNG main cast members wore lifts (or tall footwear) except 6'4" Frakes and 6'3" Dorn (Worf's big head makeup made him look the same height as Riker). 5'3" Marina Sirtis walked around in 3" heels.
Usually 5'10" Brent Spiner looked ca. an inch taller than Stewart. However, there is an episode where Data is practicing Shakespeare on the holodeck, and he is wearing medieval constume with flat footwear. Picard, in his usual boots, looks about 2 inches taller than him. When Data gets back to his uniform, he's a tad taller again.
Lorne said on 1/May/13
said on 28/Apr/13
Patrick Stewart on set of the new X-Men film with a 5'10'' Bryan Singer and Ian McKellen and Shawn Ashmore who are both 5'11.'' Though I can't see his footwear, he doesn't appear to be wearing his thick-heeled cowboy boots... :)
Marco said on 15/Apr/13
I'd say peak height 176cm, (5'9.25) and nowadays 5'8.5 (174cm), clearly taller than Ben Kingsley
said on 6/Apr/13
Patrick with Ben Kingsley who is listed on here as 5'7.75'' Click Here
Byron T. said on 21/Mar/13
@ shredder: Thanks! I was very excited to meet Stewart and he was a nice celebrity (even greeted me prior to our brief photo op session).
said on 17/Mar/13
@ shredder: Here are the boots I was wearing in my photo with him: Click Here
Stewart was wearing cowboy boots similar to the ones he's wearing in this photo: Click Here
At the lowest, Stewart is 5'8'' and McAvoy is still 5'7.''
Brad said on 4/Mar/13
5' 8". 5' 10" is laughable, sorry Patrick and stop charging $80.
Byron T. said on 19/Jan/13
@ DarkestKnight: No lifts, just thick heeled boots. I'd peg him in the 5'8''-5'9'' range barefoot.
DarkestKnight said on 17/Jan/13
@Byron: Did it seem like Patrick Stewart was wearing lifts when you had met him? I never thought his 5'10'' claims true. Otherwise, Rob's listing is spot on!
said on 12/Jan/13
Here's my photo with Stewart @ Ohio Comic Con 2012:
We're both wearing boots in the photo, but he's wearing thicker ones. Also, he's closer to the camera than I am. So he has very minimal height advantage to a weak 5'9'' guy like myself.
TWINGO said on 21/Dec/12
I am a fan of Star Trek and watched many times the movie generations and am sure that stewart and shatner have the same height, average 173 to 175 cm. Congratulations for the accuracy.
LukeT said on 22/Oct/12
Just had my photo taken with Sir Patrick over the weekend at a London-based Star Trek convention. I'd say 5'8" is reasonable. He actually stood at about 5'9", but was wearing cowboy boots with big heels.
Byron T. said on 29/Sep/12
He's 5'9'' tops. I met him recently at a comic book convention and he was barely a 1/2 inch taller me due to wearing thicker heeled boots (I'm only a weak 5'9''). Also, he's a few inches taller than a 5'7'' James McAvoy in their pics together.
Michael said on 29/Nov/11
He was born near me and some of my parents friends knew him, and they said he was relatively small compared to a 6 ft 5 man who was with him. No more than 5 ft 9.
Shaun said on 30/Oct/11
Remember Arsenio Hall is 5'11". He looks at least 6 inches taller than him right?
said on 30/Oct/11
Didn't look taller than James Corden when they are their tiff at the Women's Awards.
Rob pause at 7:41. How tall does his son look? 6'5"? 6'6"?
[Editor Rob: I seen that guy at an event and he didn't look as tall as that.]
Andy M said on 16/Aug/11
Absolutely correct, he looked an exact 5'9" in TNG. The listing looks spot on
Marco Escuandolas said on 6/Aug/11
I saw Stewart perform his one man show of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" back in 1994 with a reception afterwards. I stood next to him during the reception. Patrick Stewart is NOT a tall man. He has a tall presence, but he is short. I'm no giant at 6' 3", but I towered over him. Needless to say, realizing that you're standing there looking down on PICARD'S BALD HEAD is quite an empowering experience!
Yaspaa said on 13/Jul/11
Happy 71st Mr. Stewart.
guyfrommars said on 10/Jul/11
Also, in an episode of TNG when Data is rehearsing A Christmas Carol on the holodeck, and he's wearing slippers as Scrooge, he seems a bit shorter than Picard, who's wearing his usual boots (and lifts). Later, when Spiner is back in his uniform and boots, he's again around an inch taller than him.
Also, Stewart is only around half an inch shorter than 5'11.5" Famke Janssen in the episode The Perfect Mate. He was wearing 2-inch lifts in TNG, which boosted his 5'9" height to 5'11".
guyfrommars said on 4/Jun/11
lorne: See my link to the closeups of Stewart's obvious lifts. With those, he was easily 5'11" (adding 2 inches to his barefoot height) in TNG. Spiner was 5'10" barefoot, 5'11" in his boots, so I guess they were identical with Stewart. I guess, in Nemesis they had different footwear, and Stewart probably didn't have lifts. That explains it.
Anonymous said on 18/Dec/10
i just walked by him yesterday (brooklyn, NY). looks 5'9" tops.
Caesar said on 2/Oct/07
Stewart definitely wore boots with some elevation in TNG. Famke Janssen looked three inches shorter than him in the episode she guest starred, and she is listed as 5'11.5. Even with her barefoot Stewart would require some serious enhancement to look that much taller. But if you see the episode, it is quite clear he looks noticeably taller.
Mark said on 11/Sep/07
Patrick Stewart can give the illusion of height with his military-like posture as seen in TNG and his trade-mark uniform pull-down whenever he stands up from his captain's chair. On a height scale, he may also gain an unfair 0.5" in advantage due to his cone-like head, while eye-to-eye still be shorter. I would have to put Stewart in the 5'8.5" range max.
Dangerhorse said on 9/Aug/07
I just walked past him outside his house, he is no more than 5ft 7In I would say. Dissapointingly short for a starship captain.
ras said on 5/Jul/07
Could have been 5'9.75 in his peak height also. I agree with 5'9.
MHouillon said on 12/Mar/07
Thanks, alto. That's what I'm saying. These days 5'9 (175cm). WAS 177cm.
alto said on 4/Mar/07
He looks shorter than 5'10, but taller than 5'6. I'd assume in cm, he is no taller than 175, making him a perfect 5'9. That comes from watching a lot of The Next Generation.
MHouillon said on 26/Dec/06
No, Patrick Stewart is still a 175cm (5'9") minimum. Okay, never a 178cm (5'10"), but not in the 5'8-5'8.5 area.
ShortNSweet said on 26/Dec/06
Go back and watch some old STNG episodes from the late 80's. Espeically the early seasons. Practially the WHOLE CAST with the exception of Frakes are wearing at least 3 inch lifts. Sirtis looks like she's about ready to tumble over from her 5" lifts when she walks. After the first two years, they changed the look of the uniform (added collars, etc) and went to a boot that had a flat bottom (like a tennis shoe) instead of the traditional seperate heel. The funniest lift was when a young Teri Hatcher played a transporter tech in that very slinky uniform (she looked GREAT!). But, when they had a wide angle shot, you could tell she was practically tippy toeing from the lifts. Cheers.
Glenn said on 15/Dec/06
I can back you Horse.read my old comment below.
The Horse of FUNK said on 13/Dec/06
Just watched Excalibur the day ago and I swear he's like 5'8.5, maybe 5'9 and never was 5'10. But of course, I have nothing to back my claims up with :p
[Editor Rob: very possibly the next generation 'lift' rumour could have been it...although in 94 he was taller than shatner]
sf said on 17/Nov/06
Wow - now I know why they called him Jean luc Pic-HARD.
Lame, I know...
Glenn said on 17/Nov/06
In the early 90s,I saw him as big as 5-9.5.then Ive seen him 5-8.5.age? lifts?
LuckyLuciano said on 17/Nov/06
I dated a girl who is a semi-famous fitter/stylist and she said he wasn't tall but was the l a r g e s t man in Hollywood. If you know what I mean.
sam cowles said on 17/Nov/06
I met him face to face at my graduation last year as he is chancellor of the University of Huddersfield. I'm 5' 8" and he was no way taller than me!I have seen him several times since and he look around 5' 7" - 5' 8" to my eyes.
Antron said on 16/Nov/06
To me Picard always looked about average height and Riker a tall man. Maybe Patrick is about 5'8.5" these days barefoot. He's 66 years old, so he could have easily been an inch or so taller in his prime. This listing at 5'9" is accurate enough.
MHouillon said on 9/Sep/06
Okay, 5'10.5" (179cm) isn't really the truth. He is and was never in the 179cm-range, and not in the 173cm-range either. 175cm-176cm for Mr. Stewart.
Editor Rob said on 8/Sep/06
"Mr. Stewart, who is 5-foot-10 1/2, said that he felt himself becoming smaller to play the role. ''I've shrunk by three inches,''...I've found a way of making my body do that. My chest has gone completely concave"
MHouillon said on 1/Sep/06
Thank you, Cockney. Finally more people notice, that Stewart has the same appearance, and a similar posture that the classic 175cm (5'9")-actor Ed Harris these days. Never a 5'8" !
Cockney said on 14/Aug/06
Stood next to him when he was filming a tv inspector show with the sidekick women from ricky garvais extras last year. I am 5 foot 8 and I would have guessed patrick was 5 foot 9 because I looked up a little at him.
Larry said on 10/Jun/06
MHouillon - Very interesting points! :-) I'm NOT a medical doctor, but I am a PhD developmental zoologist. My specialty isn't HUMANS, per se, but I have mostly studied mammals & that's us too! OK, The femur/tibia length ratio is not constant in humans, but DOES fall within a normal range. The ratio is normally expressed as femur:tibia. As everyone knows, the femur is the upper leg bone and the tibia is part of the lower leg bone PAIRING (with the smaller fibula). In probably 99% of the human population the femur is longer than the tibia. The 1% in which the tibia is ACTUALLY longer are classed as rare enough to be considered aborrations (deformity or mutation). The femur/ tibia percentage ratio from individual to individual normally falls from 52:48 UP to 56:44. This ratio is dispersed over a VARIETY of heights. Taller people do not necessarily have a higher ratio, and the reverse is also true. So, a person whose lower leg is LONGER than their upper leg could be a clue about "lifts" or "elevator shoes". Now, lower vs. upper body length is complicated & is at least partially determined by gender and ethnicity. Two individuals of EXACTLY the same height might have a leg length that varies by as much as 4". Not talking about inseam here, but total leg length.
As far as HOW MUCH can you boost someone's height? Well, if you don't CARE if it's obvious. They increased the height of Schuler Helmsley from 6'3" to 7" IN VAN HELSING. But it was obvious from the shots & from his movement, even though he's an experienced dancer. He stated it hurt like the devil too & he suffered numerous sprains & a bone spur. In the Universal Classic Monster movies they enhanced the height of:
Boris Karloff 5'11" 6'5"
Lon Chaney Jr. 6'2" 6'8"
Glen Strange 6'4" 6'10"
They did this with huge asphalt spreader boots (again, obvious).
Now, as far as how much can you boost a person's height and it NOT be obvious? Well, ladies' high heels ARE obvious AND bad for 1) the feet 2) the ankles 3) the legs & pelvis and 4) the back. How much can one increase visible height WITHOUT it looking like Frankenstein shoes? I don't know, but men are GENERALLY heavier than women & are porportioned differently. Many cowboy boots have 2" heels, but I doubt that adds a true 2", because it tilts the wearer forwards and shortens the hamstrings & calf muscles. So, most likely 1/2" of the "lift" is lost. Once again, one can SEE the high heels. I don't know what can be added with internal lifts, but unless one LIFTS the entire foot (like Frankenstein's boots), it wouldn't be 1 for 1. I guess it depends on how GOOD these lift makers are & how much PAIN the wearer is willing to suffer? I can tell you it's NOT good for the body.
Glenn said on 9/Jun/06
Your right.it doesnt make me perfect,and I can be wrong.but I have eyes too.my eyes saw what Frank saw.
MHouillon said on 9/Jun/06
If I didn't knew you people have seen many actors wearing lifts, I would ask, if you ever saw someone with lifts. The relation between the upper leg and the lower leg is defined by the knee. It's slightly under in the middle-line, so the upper leg is a bit longer than the lower leg. Look at Tom Cruise or Robert deNiro (in "Taxi Driver") or Kiefer Sutherland ("24"). They wear such huge lifts (approx. 2+ inches, that's 5!cm) + heels, their lower leg appear as long as the upper leg, sometimes even longer !!! (Which is a clear sign of wearing lifts.)
Second: The belt line. Lift-using doesn't increase your upper-body-height. So the relation of this comes into a mis-balance, too.
So you can't wear lifts of an unlimited height (or thickness), otherwise it will look ridiculous. Ever realised it ? So if someone claims: "I made William Shatner looking 3 inches taller trough lifts" (maybe plus 1.5 inch fancy Star Trek boots heel) we are talking about almost 10 cm !!! Hello ? Whith such a mis-balance between upper and lower body you can go to the circus!
Here it comes: I never saw Stewart with such mis-balances. Not when I saw him in person, not on Television. If he ever wore lifts, then the discreet ones. In comparison to 194cm Jonathan Frakes (yes, 194cm) and to 181cm Brent Spiner Stewart could look 179cm at times. Because of discreet lifts. They raised him from 176 to 179. Not from 173cm to 179cm.
I will not question your observations of Stewart being 5'8. But meeting all those celebs doesn't mean to have the ability of a perfect height-guessing.
I will not say I don't believe you. But there is a thing that I believe more:
Patrick Stewart is 176cm.
leonari said on 8/Jun/06
I agree with Frank. Plus Glenn said he saw him from 5'8" to 5'10"... 5'8" it is. Time for a downgrade ROB!
Glenn said on 7/Jun/06
I saw him look 5-9 and 5-10 as well as 5-8.in Franks defence Stewart screams of lifts and looks short and a fake 5-10.
Frank2 said on 7/Jun/06
Well, I'll go to my grave knowing Stewart is 5'8". The entire time I stood talking with him as well as when he walked by he was never more than that height.
MHouillon said on 7/Jun/06
I say it once more: I met Stweart, too (okay, 4 years ago he walked pass me) and he was NOT 5'8. Being 5'10 I compared him to myself and he was slightly under 5'10. He is never ever shorter than Ed Harris... 176cm nowadays is hust fine, thank you, Rob.
Frank2 said on 5/Jun/06
Then I must be taller than I think I am because when I've seen him he's been shorter than me by more than just an inch.
Glenn said on 4/Jun/06
Your right on alot of stuff Frank.including Elvis.I always knew Elvis wasnt 6-1.but Colin is more than 5-9.
Frank2 said on 4/Jun/06
Hallelujah! I've gotten through! Now if I can just convince you that Colin Farrell isn't 5'10" I'll have accomplished something. If I can get Tiger and few others to believe Elvis was just shy of being 6' then I can retire.
Glenn said on 2/Jun/06
Im with you on this one Frank.Stewart is 5-8.
Frank2 said on 1/Jun/06
Nope. He's shorter than me and I'm 5'11". He was five inches shorter than 6'3" Brendan Fraser in Gods and Monsters and an inch shorter than 5'11" David Dukes in the same film. Dream on.
MHouillon said on 31/May/06
Ian McKellen is a definate, classic 5'11-guy. Not 5'10.
MHouillon said on 30/May/06
Who is Stewart ? The man on the right or the man on the left (that looks like Silvester Stallone) ?
The Little Big Man said on 26/May/06
I saw him in Xmen and he was definitely no more than 4'0"
Seriously though... I was an extra in a show with him recently and 5'9" seems about right (he was a little taller than me at 5'7")
MHouillon said on 11/May/06
Thank god, we heard the last time the 5'8 (173cm)-claiming from Frank2. As I said, I saw him in 2002, too. And he appeared not shorter than 177cm... And as I said before, Stewart might be a 176cm (5'9.25) nowadays. He is and was never under 5'9 !
MHouillon said on 19/Apr/06
Okay, so I think a solid (very solid) 176cm height is a good compromise and seems to be the correct height of Mr. Stewart nowadays. Accept it, Cracks !
Glenn said on 18/Apr/06
I have to back Frank up,I saw a 5-8 version of Stewart too.and 5-9.5 as well.
Frank2 said on 17/Apr/06
Maybe there are two Patrick Stewarts. The real actor and a shorter double. The fellow I spoke with was no more than 5'8". He had a British accent and spoke about Star Trek so I think it was him. He was also smoking like a fiend which I tend to notice most actors do these days. Maybe he started smoking early and it stunted his growth.
MHouillon said on 16/Apr/06
In comparison to the 185cm guy (with the high hair), I'd say that proves the 177cm (5'9.5) for Patrick Stewart. What do you think, Rob ?
MHouillon said on 16/Apr/06
Patrick Stewart walked pass me in Hamburg, 2002 and was the same height as me (I'm 5'10), maybe just a shade under it, possible 177cm, today (2006) maybe 176cm. NO LOESS !
Merc500 said on 14/Apr/06
With my shoes off I'm around 5'10 1/2. With them on, I can get closer to six feet. If I stretch my neck out, I nearly reach it. They measured me at the Portsmouth hospital for 71 and a half inches.
Exactly how are these measurements taken? With shoes off, or on? I've watched nearly every single episode of Star Trek TNG, and Stewart always looked small. Levar Burton, no offense, looked like a midget. I always thought Stewart was around 5'7 MAYBE 5'8.
Say I'm 5'11 with my shoes on. There is almost no discernable difference between me and someone who is 6'1. Two inches is barely notcieable.
My friend, who is 6'7 1/2, I reach up to just slightly above his chin. That is a difference of eight inches.
Didn't we all think Schwarzenegger was 6'2? When he turned out to be around 5'10?
Its amazing that we care so much. Myself included, lol.
I'd like to consider height with "SHOES OFF AND MEASURE"...But they didn't do that at the doctor's office with me, and perhaps they don't do that for the stars, either.
So, without lifts, I am at least 5'11 1/2. But add that miraculous Hollywood 2", and I'm a lofty 6'1 1/2.
But that WOULD put me up to Schwarzenegger's originally perceived height. And Schwarzenegger is my about my height in REAL LIFE anyway.
AY, THERE'S THE RUB!
Regardless, Patrick Stewart seems small compared to anybody. Brent Spiner towers over him.
Glenn said on 14/Apr/06
Ive seen him look both 5-9.5 and 5-8.
Frank2 said on 14/Apr/06
Too bad I don't know you or I'd wager some money, say a grand to my favorite charity or better yet, to Stewart's. And I'd bring the tape measure.
MHouillon said on 14/Apr/06
I stay with what I've seen. He is never ever 5'8 (as Shatner is), Patrick Stewart is a 177cm (5'9.5") minimum, if he really shrunk since 2002, a 176cm (5'9.25") minimum. During the TNG series he stood 2.5 - 3 inches taller than 5'7" LeVar Burton (Geordi LaForge).
Frank2 said on 13/Apr/06
So? Don't trust me. So what? Maybe he shrank two inches by the time I met him. We both stood and spoke and no way was he 5'10". He was at least three inches shorter than me. If he had been only an inch shorter I would have certainly noticed since I always thought him to be at least 5'10" and was shocked when I met him. The young girlfriend he was in was taller than him!
MHouillon said on 13/Apr/06
No, Frank2. I don't trust you. In May 2002 Patrick Stewart gave autographs in a big media Center (Saturn, Hamburg, Germany). He was walking past me (guided by bodyguards ofcourse). I am 5'10" and he was not shorter than me. He is definitely not a 5'8. (177cm minimum). I know that you, along with Glen met almost every celeb, but that does not give you the perfect ability to judge heights perfectly. In your pic Shatner did wear very thick-soled sandales (you can see them in my picture), Stewart wears standard 1 inch heeled flat shoes (And is still 1-2cm (0.5-0.75 inches) taller that Shatner. You know, Shatner wears lifts or elevating footwear. Stewart does not.
Frank2 said on 13/Apr/06
I've seen other shots taken at that event and they're about the same height.
Editor Rob said on 10/Apr/06
He lists himself at 178cm, nearly 12stone on da resume.
Frank2 said on 24/Mar/06
Frakes could be 6'4". No argument. He's a big guy. But Stewart stood right next to me and unless I've grown some he looked to be no more that about 5'8". And yes, Ed Harris is about 5'9". If Stewart was taller than Harris, he wore lifts.
MHouillon said on 23/Mar/06
Jonathan Frakes is a damn huge guy and definitely taller than 6'3" (he's about 193cm-194cm tall, compare him to 200cm James Cromwell in Star Trek First Contact.
Patrick Stewart is 177cm (5'9.5"), a shade over the Ed-Harris-height. And remember that he is slightly taller than Mel Gibson in "Fletcher's visions".
Frank2 said on 22/Mar/06
Frakes is 6'3".
Frank2 said on 19/Mar/06
He is most definitely 5'8". I'd put hard cash on it. I walked up and introduced myself and we spoke for about a minute. I've run into several celebs at that very same market. Another was Roscoe Lee Brown, the incredibly talented black actor who played the cook in John Wayne's The Cowboys. We had a very nice conversation. Brown is also 5'8". That was about four years ago. As for Stewart possibly being "a broke back mountaineer," well, I tend to doubt it. I can say he's a chain smoker or at least was when I saw him.
Glenn said on 19/Mar/06
He can look 5-9,5-10 in public.doesnt mean he is 5-8.could be lifts.and he is notorious,along with the drummer from Rush,as a no photo with guy.neverEVER,will they pose with you or want a camera near them.petty pricks.I back Frank 2 up that he might be 5-8 and a broke back mountaineer.
MHouillon said on 16/Mar/06
It cracks me up if you claim that Stewart is only 1 inch taller than 5'7 LeVar Burton. He was at least 2.5 inches taller than "Geordi". So 177-178 for Mr. Stewart.
Eggplant said on 19/Feb/06
Once again, going back to Madame Tussaud's... Patrick Stewart was right around my height, or very slightly shorter. 5'9 1/2"-5'10".
CoolJ said on 6/Feb/06
In most shots in TNG.. Stewart looked 5'10.. maybe a weak 5'10..
I saw one episode where he wasn't wearing his black shoes.. but thin soled (near normal in appearance shoes).. he just got out of the holodeck in some fighting mode. he easily looked 8" shorter than Riker. Perhaps he's a lift wearing guy?
MHouillon said on 18/Jan/06
What are you claiming ? Patrick Stewart is at least a solid 177cm ! A minimum 2 and a half inches taller than 5'7" LeVar Burton (Geordi LaForge) !
MisterPL said on 17/Jan/06
I met Star Trek costume designer Robert Blackman a few years back and he told me Patrick Stewart was 5' 8".
d said on 15/Dec/05
in watching every STNG episode at least twice, and constantly sizing up these characters, my best guess for this guy is 5'8" to 5'9" tops. He always seems to have a "head down" posture, so he may be able to stretch out an inch, but 5'10" no way man.
Worf generally looked about a 1/2" shorter than Riker, they were very close. But who knows what they might have done with footware.
Bill said on 24/Nov/05
I met him backstage at a play once...I'm 5'8 1/2", and he was very slightly shorter than me.
Horatio said on 19/Nov/05
No way in hell Jonathan Frakes is 6'4". The actor who plays Worf claims he is 6'4", and Riker always appeared a good 2-3 inches shorter than Worf (taking into account the Klingon head ridges).
Joel said on 13/Nov/05
I think 5'8 1/2 seems accurate for him
MHouillon said on 15/Oct/05
Nonsense. He is 177-178cm, if he where 5'5 or in Al Pacino-line (5'6"), he would have looked ridiculuos in total shots to Jonathan Frakes (6'4"). Thank god he is 5'10, so the difference isn't that much. Brent Spiner is 181cm tall, there were many shots with Patrick and him. There were no more than 3cm between Jean-Luc and "Data".
[Editor Rob: there was a promo shot of Stewart facing off beside Ricky Gervais. In 2005 he did still look taller...speaking of Spiner.
You brought up Data. I've seen those episodes spiner done for Enterprise and in all honesty standing beside guys like Bakula and Connor Trinnear I don't think he's quite 5ft 11 these days...only possibility is he may have lost 1cm or the main cast members had bigger sized footwear... ;)]
CelebHeights Editor said on 25/Aug/05
From a 1994 startrek newsgroup thread:
"Saw him outside the Eugene O'Neill Theater a couple of Christmas's ago, I noticed that he was at least a couple of inches shorter than me - I'm 5' 10"
"I hate to deflate everyone's balloons though, but Patrick Stewart is only about 5'5"-5'6". This report comes from a friend of mine (5'7") that rode the elevator with him at Denver's Star Fest '88"
"I seem to remember him being tall, but shorter than I am. I'm 6'4". I'd guess he was 5'9" or 5'10"
MHouillon said on 7/Aug/05
That's not 10 cms, more 8cm-9cm. Kelsey is 186cm. So Stewart is 177-178cm.
MHouillon said on 30/Jun/05
Jean-Luc is 5'10".
Bill said on 18/Apr/05
His early Bios say 5-8 I think its the old 2" growth on the plane to the USA, do all hollywood tape measures start at 2"?
[Editor Rob: No, but I'll tell you something, this 2 inch growth phenomenon is bizarre. Maybe when Tom Cruise says he was measured at 5ft 9 HE IS NOT LYING...of course, this is his measurement on the Mir space station after his spine is massively decompressed!]