Add a Comment5728 comments
Average Guess (477 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 3.36in (191.4cm)
Current: 5ft 11.76in (182.3cm)
Peak: 6ft 3.36in (191.4cm)
Current: 5ft 11.76in (182.3cm)
ammy said on 2/Sep/21
looka 6'3 next to Ali
looka 6'3 next to Ali
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Sep/21
@Chaos
Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.
@Chaos
Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.
Ian C. said on 2/Sep/21
You would think, just as a matter of simple logic, that tall people would lose more height in old age as an absolute measurement. They're taller and have more to lose. The question is, do tall and short people lose the same percentages of their youthful heights?
On average there can be little doubt that longevity favours short people over tall. Longevity is also far more prevalent among people with some body types. You can bet with confidence that Woody Allen, for example, will make it well into his nineties. He's short and strong, and also notably temperate in his personal habits. Apparently he has never drunk or smoked. He has not grown noticeably fatter with age, and his father made it to well past ninety.
Although you never can tell. Alfred Hitchcock and Peter Ustinov, both obese, made it into their eighties. Other people who seemed very strong, like Tyrone Power and Robert Shaw, died quite young of sudden heart attacks. Cancer is difficult to predict because it can strike down the young.
Clint's chances of making it to 100 are really quite good, although he is not only losing height but jettisoning weight. His muscles seem to be wasting away. His mind must be very good, and he can summon the energy to produce and direct movies, which would be strenuous labour at any age.
Not everyone who lives to be unusually old is all that happy about it, simply because old age robs you of much of the physical capacity you need to be comfortable and reasonably happy. Hunter S. Thompson and Ernest Hemingway ended their lives while they were still able to operate firearms, because both men had been reduced to little else but pain. I respect that, actually. In fact, if I were Clint's age, I would seriously consider skipping the last act.
You would think, just as a matter of simple logic, that tall people would lose more height in old age as an absolute measurement. They're taller and have more to lose. The question is, do tall and short people lose the same percentages of their youthful heights?
On average there can be little doubt that longevity favours short people over tall. Longevity is also far more prevalent among people with some body types. You can bet with confidence that Woody Allen, for example, will make it well into his nineties. He's short and strong, and also notably temperate in his personal habits. Apparently he has never drunk or smoked. He has not grown noticeably fatter with age, and his father made it to well past ninety.
Although you never can tell. Alfred Hitchcock and Peter Ustinov, both obese, made it into their eighties. Other people who seemed very strong, like Tyrone Power and Robert Shaw, died quite young of sudden heart attacks. Cancer is difficult to predict because it can strike down the young.
Clint's chances of making it to 100 are really quite good, although he is not only losing height but jettisoning weight. His muscles seem to be wasting away. His mind must be very good, and he can summon the energy to produce and direct movies, which would be strenuous labour at any age.
Not everyone who lives to be unusually old is all that happy about it, simply because old age robs you of much of the physical capacity you need to be comfortable and reasonably happy. Hunter S. Thompson and Ernest Hemingway ended their lives while they were still able to operate firearms, because both men had been reduced to little else but pain. I respect that, actually. In fact, if I were Clint's age, I would seriously consider skipping the last act.
ChaosControl said on 2/Sep/21
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21
Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most
So I’m just not supposed to exist until late in the evening after 7 hours of construction work or training hard in combat sports?
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21
Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most
So I’m just not supposed to exist until late in the evening after 7 hours of construction work or training hard in combat sports?
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
People who are near dead don't still make movies though, it takes tremendous energy and concentration to make and produce a film. Very stressful and time consuming for many, but CLint always made it look easier as he was so layed back during the filming. Actors loved working with him as he was so economical.
People who are near dead don't still make movies though, it takes tremendous energy and concentration to make and produce a film. Very stressful and time consuming for many, but CLint always made it look easier as he was so layed back during the filming. Actors loved working with him as he was so economical.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
Not a hair under 6'3 till his 60s (the 1990s) in my opinion.
Not a hair under 6'3 till his 60s (the 1990s) in my opinion.
Tall Ssm said on 30/Aug/21
@Avi, strange statement, making those over 6’2” an aberration of what people are “meant to be”? Height loss can be more noticeable in taller people it’s true but I think genetics, health and lifestyle are the primary drivers.
@Avi, strange statement, making those over 6’2” an aberration of what people are “meant to be”? Height loss can be more noticeable in taller people it’s true but I think genetics, health and lifestyle are the primary drivers.
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21
Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most
Someone 6'3+ is going to have issues especially later in life. Of course plenty of average or even shorter older guys lose height or slump over but many taller guys (if they even make it to a decent old age) have a much more pronounced shrinkage.
I think Clint was a strong 6'3 in youth and now barely 6'0. He seemed to have been dipping in the 6'2 zone since the 1980s. It's hard to believe he lost 3 inches though. 1.5 seems to be more common
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21
Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most
Someone 6'3+ is going to have issues especially later in life. Of course plenty of average or even shorter older guys lose height or slump over but many taller guys (if they even make it to a decent old age) have a much more pronounced shrinkage.
I think Clint was a strong 6'3 in youth and now barely 6'0. He seemed to have been dipping in the 6'2 zone since the 1980s. It's hard to believe he lost 3 inches though. 1.5 seems to be more common
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Aug/21
@James
Anecdotally, I can’t say that I’ve noticed if taller people do or don’t lose more height. Women are shorter on average than men and I have read that woman lose more height on average. As to confining the observation to one gender or the other, it would be interesting if there is anything out there taller men or women lose more height than their shorter, same sex counterparts.
@James
Anecdotally, I can’t say that I’ve noticed if taller people do or don’t lose more height. Women are shorter on average than men and I have read that woman lose more height on average. As to confining the observation to one gender or the other, it would be interesting if there is anything out there taller men or women lose more height than their shorter, same sex counterparts.
James B 171.5 said on 24/Aug/21
tall in the saddle- I think it's mostly the tall folk who are prone to height loss as they age....
tall in the saddle- I think it's mostly the tall folk who are prone to height loss as they age....
Tall In The Saddle said on 24/Aug/21
@Canson
Yeah, it makes you want to be mindful to maintain your own posture, flexibility and bone health as best you can, not that it's always in anyone's complete control.
Not just to avoid notable loss of standing height but also being bent and bowed isn't desirable or healthy for a number of other obvious reasons anyway. Karl Malden is another celebrity that comes to mind as far as a severely bowed neck/back goes. I think he got to the point where his standing height was on par with Michael Douglas or perhaps even a bit less. I think he was a very solid 6'1" in his day but he did reach the grand old age of 97. With greater average life spans I guess we're going to see increased instances of extreme height loss, the rate of which seems to increase exponentially after a certain advanced age.
@Canson
Yeah, it makes you want to be mindful to maintain your own posture, flexibility and bone health as best you can, not that it's always in anyone's complete control.
Not just to avoid notable loss of standing height but also being bent and bowed isn't desirable or healthy for a number of other obvious reasons anyway. Karl Malden is another celebrity that comes to mind as far as a severely bowed neck/back goes. I think he got to the point where his standing height was on par with Michael Douglas or perhaps even a bit less. I think he was a very solid 6'1" in his day but he did reach the grand old age of 97. With greater average life spans I guess we're going to see increased instances of extreme height loss, the rate of which seems to increase exponentially after a certain advanced age.
Canson said on 22/Aug/21
@Tall in the Saddle: I’ve noticed that a lot of the older celebs and older population who have lost noticeable height also have a major and very pronounced curve in the neck or the neck appears shorter for some reason lol. By noticeable height I mean someone like Clint or Donald Trump. Then you have the David Prowse category where he had lost even more than those guys. In his case, he already had a very large head which looked a bit disproportionate with a shorter (6’1) frame as opposed to a 6’5 or 6’6 frame that he once had
@Tall in the Saddle: I’ve noticed that a lot of the older celebs and older population who have lost noticeable height also have a major and very pronounced curve in the neck or the neck appears shorter for some reason lol. By noticeable height I mean someone like Clint or Donald Trump. Then you have the David Prowse category where he had lost even more than those guys. In his case, he already had a very large head which looked a bit disproportionate with a shorter (6’1) frame as opposed to a 6’5 or 6’6 frame that he once had
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Aug/21
@Hong
Clint’s been directing himself for so long now and I don’t know that he would or even could take direction from anyone else. That was probably why he wanted to take over the reigns in the first place, for complete artistic control. But, I see your point, even as lead, Clint can convey an everyman quality often seen in character roles due to many of his subtle, nuanced characters. In Unforgiven I like how Clint starts out as your unassuming, average Joe farmer before turning into an almost supernatural Angel of Death by movies end. He was an easy target as he rode out of town but his chilling warnings and established aura was enough to cause them to lay down their guns as if they came to believe they were dealing with someone more than human. Sorry to rant but that’s such a great film.
@Chaos
A lying down measure could work, that’s if Clint can even sleep straight in bed these days. We all seem to agree though that without the kinks, he’d prob make 6 feet. Clint wasn’t quite 6’4” but there’s no argument that he’s a lost a ton of height, particularly by way of an ever shrinking torso.
@Hong
Clint’s been directing himself for so long now and I don’t know that he would or even could take direction from anyone else. That was probably why he wanted to take over the reigns in the first place, for complete artistic control. But, I see your point, even as lead, Clint can convey an everyman quality often seen in character roles due to many of his subtle, nuanced characters. In Unforgiven I like how Clint starts out as your unassuming, average Joe farmer before turning into an almost supernatural Angel of Death by movies end. He was an easy target as he rode out of town but his chilling warnings and established aura was enough to cause them to lay down their guns as if they came to believe they were dealing with someone more than human. Sorry to rant but that’s such a great film.
@Chaos
A lying down measure could work, that’s if Clint can even sleep straight in bed these days. We all seem to agree though that without the kinks, he’d prob make 6 feet. Clint wasn’t quite 6’4” but there’s no argument that he’s a lost a ton of height, particularly by way of an ever shrinking torso.
Parker said on 19/Aug/21
Here's Clint filming the Mule with Bradley Cooper
Click Here
Think he could still have measured 6' 2-3 years ago.
Another one with Bradley in his mid 80's Click Here
Here's Clint filming the Mule with Bradley Cooper
Click Here
Think he could still have measured 6' 2-3 years ago.
Another one with Bradley in his mid 80's Click Here
ChaosControl said on 18/Aug/21
@T. I. T. S. Maybe you could get him at 6’0 lying down?
@T. I. T. S. Maybe you could get him at 6’0 lying down?
Hong said on 18/Aug/21
@Tall In The Saddle,in a perfect world Clint was indeed more in a supporting role and Costner as the lead,but Clint Directed it,it was his movie,what would be interesting is to see Clint in a movie in which he is just another actor,a movie Directed by someone else,Clint in someone else's movie playing a supporting Character.
@Tall In The Saddle,in a perfect world Clint was indeed more in a supporting role and Costner as the lead,but Clint Directed it,it was his movie,what would be interesting is to see Clint in a movie in which he is just another actor,a movie Directed by someone else,Clint in someone else's movie playing a supporting Character.
Tall In The Saddle said on 18/Aug/21
@Viper
Probably could hit 6 ft but I wouldn’t recommend Clint gut busting to get there for a number of reasons. At the least, they would have to have someone ready to catch him, just in case.
@Hong
Off the top, A PERFECT WORLD is one film in which Clint receded from the lead role to assume a strong supporting role. Not a lot of air time during the film as I recall but powerful and significant input nonetheless.
Costner has made some not so great films but when he’s on his game he’s posted some great performances in the right movies. I don’t recall any good scenes to compare him with Clint but informal photos around that time seem to indicate a visible edge to Clint, as we might expect if Clint was standing about 6’ 2 1/2” as at the time.
@Viper
Probably could hit 6 ft but I wouldn’t recommend Clint gut busting to get there for a number of reasons. At the least, they would have to have someone ready to catch him, just in case.
@Hong
Off the top, A PERFECT WORLD is one film in which Clint receded from the lead role to assume a strong supporting role. Not a lot of air time during the film as I recall but powerful and significant input nonetheless.
Costner has made some not so great films but when he’s on his game he’s posted some great performances in the right movies. I don’t recall any good scenes to compare him with Clint but informal photos around that time seem to indicate a visible edge to Clint, as we might expect if Clint was standing about 6’ 2 1/2” as at the time.
viper said on 17/Aug/21
Clint may still hit 6-0 standing completely straight
Clint may still hit 6-0 standing completely straight
Hong said on 17/Aug/21
He does look a bit ridiculous in the fighting scene and it looks like there is a bit of flirting going on between Clint and a woman who looks like she is only in her forties,and even in this movie he's wearing cowboy boots but because of his weak knees and hump it doesn't add any extra height.lm sure there are parts for elderly men in other movies,it would be interesting to see Clint in a movie where he is not the main character,to see him in a few character roles.I don't think since he hit the big time he's ever stared in any movie in which he was not the main guy.Maybe he's just to big a name and to type cast for people to see beyond all his legendary roles.Its a pity I'd say he would make a great Character in his very old age.
He does look a bit ridiculous in the fighting scene and it looks like there is a bit of flirting going on between Clint and a woman who looks like she is only in her forties,and even in this movie he's wearing cowboy boots but because of his weak knees and hump it doesn't add any extra height.lm sure there are parts for elderly men in other movies,it would be interesting to see Clint in a movie where he is not the main character,to see him in a few character roles.I don't think since he hit the big time he's ever stared in any movie in which he was not the main guy.Maybe he's just to big a name and to type cast for people to see beyond all his legendary roles.Its a pity I'd say he would make a great Character in his very old age.
Ian C. said on 17/Aug/21
90 is nothing like 70, Hong. Most people who are 90 are dead.
I have seen the trailer to Cry Macho, and in it Clint punches somebody in the face. He also gives a much younger woman the eye. Well come on. I'm going to miss Clint when he's gone, but he's got that near-death look. He looks worse than Joe Biden. His spine is now severely misshapen, and he can't straighten his knees.
You can see how Clint looked when he was 70, in Space Cowboys. And old guy for sure, but still quite able-bodied. If Clint thinks that he looks anything like that now, he's severely deluded.
Robert Redford is another actor who thinks he looks younger than he is. Robert Redford played a sixty year-old in The Old Man and the Gun, when he was 82. I have been 60, and Redford looked a lot older than 60 to me. If you're young, you might be surprised how healthy and able-bodied 60 is. You're not 40 but you're not 80 either.
90 is nothing like 70, Hong. Most people who are 90 are dead.
I have seen the trailer to Cry Macho, and in it Clint punches somebody in the face. He also gives a much younger woman the eye. Well come on. I'm going to miss Clint when he's gone, but he's got that near-death look. He looks worse than Joe Biden. His spine is now severely misshapen, and he can't straighten his knees.
You can see how Clint looked when he was 70, in Space Cowboys. And old guy for sure, but still quite able-bodied. If Clint thinks that he looks anything like that now, he's severely deluded.
Robert Redford is another actor who thinks he looks younger than he is. Robert Redford played a sixty year-old in The Old Man and the Gun, when he was 82. I have been 60, and Redford looked a lot older than 60 to me. If you're young, you might be surprised how healthy and able-bodied 60 is. You're not 40 but you're not 80 either.
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Aug/21
@Hong
So the book character is 38. Is the movie character being passed off as 70? Obviously that would've required some tweaks from book to screen play but then we still arrive at a 91 yo Clint in the role. This film has a real air of Gran Torino about it only Clint is 13 years older again. I'm not complaining, loved Gran Torino and I'll still definitely watch this one.
@Hong
So the book character is 38. Is the movie character being passed off as 70? Obviously that would've required some tweaks from book to screen play but then we still arrive at a 91 yo Clint in the role. This film has a real air of Gran Torino about it only Clint is 13 years older again. I'm not complaining, loved Gran Torino and I'll still definitely watch this one.
ChaosControl said on 15/Aug/21
Wait wait wait this 90 year old man is not just directing a movie, which would be impressive enough, but also starting in and producing it?
Wait wait wait this 90 year old man is not just directing a movie, which would be impressive enough, but also starting in and producing it?
ChaosControl said on 15/Aug/21
Ian C. said on 15/Aug/21
I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.
I think of myself as straight out the womb
Ian C. said on 15/Aug/21
I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.
I think of myself as straight out the womb
Ian C. said on 15/Aug/21
The book character is 38, Hong? There is no comparison, none, between the physical limitations of someone who is 38, and someone who is 70. (I know this because I'm 69, and I was once 38.) So a 90 year-old man playing a character whose problems were the same as a 38 year-old is an absurdity.
38 is a character age often favoured by male stars who who are 50 or older. James Bond of the novels is roughly that age, and stays that age no matter the year. It's as if aging men just think of themselves as 38.
I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.
The book character is 38, Hong? There is no comparison, none, between the physical limitations of someone who is 38, and someone who is 70. (I know this because I'm 69, and I was once 38.) So a 90 year-old man playing a character whose problems were the same as a 38 year-old is an absurdity.
38 is a character age often favoured by male stars who who are 50 or older. James Bond of the novels is roughly that age, and stays that age no matter the year. It's as if aging men just think of themselves as 38.
I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.
Tall In The Saddle said on 14/Aug/21
Well, this movie might just bag Clint the award for Best New Talent In the 90 year old and over category. Competition is scarce, a real gimme. Cry Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Well, this movie might just bag Clint the award for Best New Talent In the 90 year old and over category. Competition is scarce, a real gimme. Cry Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Hong said on 13/Aug/21
In the book the guy Clint is playing is 38 years old,it's a bit of stretch,but I suppose when you Direct,produce and star in the movie you can do what you like.
In the book the guy Clint is playing is 38 years old,it's a bit of stretch,but I suppose when you Direct,produce and star in the movie you can do what you like.
Andrea said on 13/Aug/21
In The Mule (back in 2018) he can really look barely 5'11... Maybe he could still stand taller than that for a measurement, but 6' is more than likely too much by now.
In The Mule (back in 2018) he can really look barely 5'11... Maybe he could still stand taller than that for a measurement, but 6' is more than likely too much by now.
Ian C. said on 12/Aug/21
Has anyone in the history of the planet Earth produced, directed and starred in a motion picture at the age of 90? I used to flinch at actors in their 50s pretending that they were 35, and in fact Clint was guilty of that one in those Philo Beddoe movies. I'll be interested to see how old Clint's character is supposed to be in Cry Macho.
I've seen the trailer and Clint is collapsing into himself. He's heading for five foot nine, and he looks as if he can barely stand, let alone walk.
Has anyone in the history of the planet Earth produced, directed and starred in a motion picture at the age of 90? I used to flinch at actors in their 50s pretending that they were 35, and in fact Clint was guilty of that one in those Philo Beddoe movies. I'll be interested to see how old Clint's character is supposed to be in Cry Macho.
I've seen the trailer and Clint is collapsing into himself. He's heading for five foot nine, and he looks as if he can barely stand, let alone walk.
Tall In The Saddle said on 11/Aug/21
@Chaos
LOL. Well, if you had said that "something else", Rob might've been all over you like an STI. You don't want to run fowl of the Big Chief, El Macho Big Rob. This is a family site with a PG rating. Rob's XXX version of CH is apparently on the deep dark web for VIP (Very Introverted and Perverted) "members" only.
@Chaos
LOL. Well, if you had said that "something else", Rob might've been all over you like an STI. You don't want to run fowl of the Big Chief, El Macho Big Rob. This is a family site with a PG rating. Rob's XXX version of CH is apparently on the deep dark web for VIP (Very Introverted and Perverted) "members" only.
ChaosControl said on 11/Aug/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Aug/21
@Hong
The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.
So what you’re saying is... it won’t turn out well if you say than a man has a small co...nsumable poultry animal. What, did you think I was gonna say something else?
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Aug/21
@Hong
The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.
So what you’re saying is... it won’t turn out well if you say than a man has a small co...nsumable poultry animal. What, did you think I was gonna say something else?
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Aug/21
@Hong
The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.
So many classic and somewhat sagacious lines from Clint’s movies have entered into the vernacular. So quotable and instantly understood. When you’re young like us you body carries you through despite yourself. However, at some point the body will begin to fail due to wear tear and ageing . That’s when the spirit has to increasingly take up the slack ultimately becoming the sole driving force.
That’s why, I think, when some older people feel it’s time, they simply let go, no longer having a body to automatically kick in and provide life support. It all just comes down to then and their will to live.
For the foreseeable future Clint isn’t going anywhere, the spirit is clearly strong and when the irresistible time comes he may have to be dragged out kicking and screaming. Many of his movies provide a good lesson on the meaning and value of life from varied perspectives.
I believe in due admiration and respect but not idolisation per se. I think when you idolise someone you begin to eclipse your own purpose in life but, if I was forced to nominate an idol perhaps Clint would be the closest thing to. Certainly an excellent role model in many respects, not the least being work ethic.
@Hong
The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.
So many classic and somewhat sagacious lines from Clint’s movies have entered into the vernacular. So quotable and instantly understood. When you’re young like us you body carries you through despite yourself. However, at some point the body will begin to fail due to wear tear and ageing . That’s when the spirit has to increasingly take up the slack ultimately becoming the sole driving force.
That’s why, I think, when some older people feel it’s time, they simply let go, no longer having a body to automatically kick in and provide life support. It all just comes down to then and their will to live.
For the foreseeable future Clint isn’t going anywhere, the spirit is clearly strong and when the irresistible time comes he may have to be dragged out kicking and screaming. Many of his movies provide a good lesson on the meaning and value of life from varied perspectives.
I believe in due admiration and respect but not idolisation per se. I think when you idolise someone you begin to eclipse your own purpose in life but, if I was forced to nominate an idol perhaps Clint would be the closest thing to. Certainly an excellent role model in many respects, not the least being work ethic.
Hong said on 9/Aug/21
Click Here Here's the trailer for Clint's new movie,it's called Cry Macho.I think maybe he's a bit too old for the part?although he does get into a fist fight,I've got nothing but respect and admiration for the guy,91 years old and still active in the industry.
Editor Rob
Click Here Here's the trailer for Clint's new movie,it's called Cry Macho.I think maybe he's a bit too old for the part?although he does get into a fist fight,I've got nothing but respect and admiration for the guy,91 years old and still active in the industry.
Editor RobSometimes keeping active, using your mind and having purpose, lengthens our lifespan.
James B 171.5 said on 9/Aug/21
clint probably was 6'3 flat in 1988. a half inch loss from his peak
clint probably was 6'3 flat in 1988. a half inch loss from his peak
Tall In The Saddle said on 9/Aug/21
@Hong
Good photos. On face value, without entertaining possible variables, Clint is standing well next to Liam in those pics. So I guess at that stage of his career (1988) you would view Clint as having undergone little or no height less, since you have peak Clint at 6'3" or barely above? Perhaps others might've guessed Clint to have lost a little bit of height by age 58.
@Hong
Good photos. On face value, without entertaining possible variables, Clint is standing well next to Liam in those pics. So I guess at that stage of his career (1988) you would view Clint as having undergone little or no height less, since you have peak Clint at 6'3" or barely above? Perhaps others might've guessed Clint to have lost a little bit of height by age 58.
Tall Sam said on 8/Aug/21
Yeah I believe there was info that Scott’s mom is rather short, at least a foot under Clint and the result of the womanizing Clints ongoing dalliances with a flight stewardess.
Yeah I believe there was info that Scott’s mom is rather short, at least a foot under Clint and the result of the womanizing Clints ongoing dalliances with a flight stewardess.
James B 171.5cm said on 8/Aug/21
Rob it seems Kyle Eastwood inherited the tall genes from his dad whereasas Scott Eastwood inherited the good looks (no homo)
Editor Rob
Rob it seems Kyle Eastwood inherited the tall genes from his dad whereasas Scott Eastwood inherited the good looks (no homo)
Editor RobSometimes genes are interesting...and throw up what you expect, and in other cases unexpected results. I believe they have different Mothers.
Tall In The Saddle said on 8/Aug/21
If Kyle was 6’2 1/2” peak I would guess it fair to give Clint about or close to 6’3” at least up until 1991. In my eyes he still edged Kyle who we can safely assume had stopped growing by 23 yo. Prob for me with Kyle is that I haven’t seen anyone to compare him with aside from Clint which can end up being a circular argument.
In Dead Pool 1988 I didn’t see any opportunities to properly compare Clint to Neeson. I think their longest scene together had Clint walking along on higher ground. Surely there would be offset photos of them together but ti date I’ve yet to see any.
If Kyle was 6’2 1/2” peak I would guess it fair to give Clint about or close to 6’3” at least up until 1991. In my eyes he still edged Kyle who we can safely assume had stopped growing by 23 yo. Prob for me with Kyle is that I haven’t seen anyone to compare him with aside from Clint which can end up being a circular argument.
In Dead Pool 1988 I didn’t see any opportunities to properly compare Clint to Neeson. I think their longest scene together had Clint walking along on higher ground. Surely there would be offset photos of them together but ti date I’ve yet to see any.
Hong said on 7/Aug/21
@Arch Stanton,I wasn't aware Kyle claimed 6ft4,he definitely did not look that tall.
@Arch Stanton,I wasn't aware Kyle claimed 6ft4,he definitely did not look that tall.
Rory said on 7/Aug/21
Id say weak 6ft3 for Clint by late 1980s, down from strong 6ft3 in the 60s/early 70s.
Id say weak 6ft3 for Clint by late 1980s, down from strong 6ft3 in the 60s/early 70s.
Arch Stanton said on 6/Aug/21
Comparison with Liam Neeson in 1988 and Clint with James Cromwell in 1989 I wouldn't put Clint under 6'3 in that period. He started looking more 6'2,5 into the 90s. I think 6'2.5 is probably about right for Kyle, he's definitely nowhere not 6'4 anyway and that's what he's claimed.
Comparison with Liam Neeson in 1988 and Clint with James Cromwell in 1989 I wouldn't put Clint under 6'3 in that period. He started looking more 6'2,5 into the 90s. I think 6'2.5 is probably about right for Kyle, he's definitely nowhere not 6'4 anyway and that's what he's claimed.
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Aug/21
@Hong
Yeah, the 6'4" listing for Kyle is more than curious. One listing has 193 cm converted to 6'3" so they obviously got that wrong in more ways than one. I wonder if they got the idea that Kyle was 6'4" at the point in time he stood level with Clint without accounting for Clint's height loss or the fact that Clint was never a full 6'4" himself. Of course there would've been some point in time when Clint had shrunk sufficiently for Kyle to see him eye to eye before Clint went on to lose even more height.
@Hong
Yeah, the 6'4" listing for Kyle is more than curious. One listing has 193 cm converted to 6'3" so they obviously got that wrong in more ways than one. I wonder if they got the idea that Kyle was 6'4" at the point in time he stood level with Clint without accounting for Clint's height loss or the fact that Clint was never a full 6'4" himself. Of course there would've been some point in time when Clint had shrunk sufficiently for Kyle to see him eye to eye before Clint went on to lose even more height.
Hong said on 1/Aug/21
Yeah Tall In The Saddle,I agree,Clint at that stage was looking in the 6ft2.75 range,Kyle IMO never looked over 6ft2,but is listed as 6ft4 on line,I think the young peak Clint would have a good inch on Kyle.
Yeah Tall In The Saddle,I agree,Clint at that stage was looking in the 6ft2.75 range,Kyle IMO never looked over 6ft2,but is listed as 6ft4 on line,I think the young peak Clint would have a good inch on Kyle.
Tall In The Saddle said on 31/Jul/21
Here’s a nice shot from 1991. 22 or 23 yo Kyle a bit slouched but 60 or 61 yo Clint I think would still be clearly taller even if Kyle straightened. There are better shots from the same time frame but I just linked the first one that came up. Wherever you have Clint at peak photos like this hammer home the unquestionable height loss Clint has experienced over the years.
Click Here
Here’s a nice shot from 1991. 22 or 23 yo Kyle a bit slouched but 60 or 61 yo Clint I think would still be clearly taller even if Kyle straightened. There are better shots from the same time frame but I just linked the first one that came up. Wherever you have Clint at peak photos like this hammer home the unquestionable height loss Clint has experienced over the years.
Click Here
Tall In The Saddle said on 30/Jul/21
I perused a number of photos going back to 1989 to 1991 with Clint and Kyle (when Kyle was 21 to 23). I think it more than fair to give Clint about 1/2" over Kyle when Clint himself was in his very late 50's to just over 60 yo. If Kyle maxed at 6'2", then that puts Clint at about 6'2 1/2", which is the height I think most us believe he was by the age range in question.
I perused a number of photos going back to 1989 to 1991 with Clint and Kyle (when Kyle was 21 to 23). I think it more than fair to give Clint about 1/2" over Kyle when Clint himself was in his very late 50's to just over 60 yo. If Kyle maxed at 6'2", then that puts Clint at about 6'2 1/2", which is the height I think most us believe he was by the age range in question.
Hong said on 30/Jul/21
Click Here Here's Kyle with Clint from 2008,Clint aged 78,at that time Clint was looking in the 6ft1 range,Kyle looks know more than 6ft2 there.It also shows how much Clint has shrank in the last 13 years.I think the young Clint was a fraction taller than Kyle.
Click Here Here's Kyle with Clint from 2008,Clint aged 78,at that time Clint was looking in the 6ft1 range,Kyle looks know more than 6ft2 there.It also shows how much Clint has shrank in the last 13 years.I think the young Clint was a fraction taller than Kyle.
Arch Stanton said on 29/Jul/21
Click Here
Difficult to see Kyle at 6'3 or over a lot of the time, maybe around 189cm is what he is.
Click Here
Difficult to see Kyle at 6'3 or over a lot of the time, maybe around 189cm is what he is.
Arch Stanton said on 29/Jul/21
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.
Rob said Kyle was more like 6 ft 2 flat! In a few photo comparisons certainly he didn't look over it. I've seen a number of his concerts and comparisons though I thought at times he could look 6'3 range. Undeniably he looks more like a 6'2 range guy in a lot of comparisons.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.
Rob said Kyle was more like 6 ft 2 flat! In a few photo comparisons certainly he didn't look over it. I've seen a number of his concerts and comparisons though I thought at times he could look 6'3 range. Undeniably he looks more like a 6'2 range guy in a lot of comparisons.
Tall In The Saddle said on 26/Jul/21
@Hong
Nice collage. I guess based on the equal weighting of separate celebrity comparisons one might have to afford Conan 6’4” or very close to. Wrongly or rightly, I maybe giving more credence to the comparisons with more iconic celebs like Neeson, Lithgow, Hoff, Goldblum and Selleck who all edged Conan and whose own heights are reasonably confirmed. Conan also acknowledged the advantage of several of those guests by over estimating their heights.
I will also note that even when photographed multiple times with the same celeb (viz Barkley) , the apparent difference in height can vary somewhat due to obvious variables in play which just goes to show how deceiving photos can be sometimes. I actually see Liam Hemsworth pulling up even with O’Brien and I have Liam at 6’3 1/2”. To further corroborate that, I see Liam easily holding the same advantage (as Conan) over Goldblum in more recent years.
@Hong
Nice collage. I guess based on the equal weighting of separate celebrity comparisons one might have to afford Conan 6’4” or very close to. Wrongly or rightly, I maybe giving more credence to the comparisons with more iconic celebs like Neeson, Lithgow, Hoff, Goldblum and Selleck who all edged Conan and whose own heights are reasonably confirmed. Conan also acknowledged the advantage of several of those guests by over estimating their heights.
I will also note that even when photographed multiple times with the same celeb (viz Barkley) , the apparent difference in height can vary somewhat due to obvious variables in play which just goes to show how deceiving photos can be sometimes. I actually see Liam Hemsworth pulling up even with O’Brien and I have Liam at 6’3 1/2”. To further corroborate that, I see Liam easily holding the same advantage (as Conan) over Goldblum in more recent years.
Tall Sam said on 24/Jul/21
Conan holds up very well against 6’3”ers like Will Ferrell, Billy Eichner and the now slightly shorter Jeff Goldblum, who at peak with arguably a smaller margin higher but is now roughly 0.5 under Conan IMO. He’d definitely have a bit of height I think on young Clint too but how much is hard to say, remember that a young Clint held up very well near George Kennedy who was certainly no shorter than Conan.
Conan holds up very well against 6’3”ers like Will Ferrell, Billy Eichner and the now slightly shorter Jeff Goldblum, who at peak with arguably a smaller margin higher but is now roughly 0.5 under Conan IMO. He’d definitely have a bit of height I think on young Clint too but how much is hard to say, remember that a young Clint held up very well near George Kennedy who was certainly no shorter than Conan.
Tall In The Saddle said on 23/Jul/21
@Rory
Agreed. Both disproportionally long arms and/or legs can be revealing legacies of a once much taller person. Clint is an ideal example of same. TBH, Clint had a shorter than average torso to begin with but it has compressed that much more with the ensuing years combined with a number of worsening postural kinks.
I wonder what Clint weighs these days? Hard to say but I might guess 147 lbs to 154 lbs? Naturally, a llot of muscle and bone density has been lost.
@Hong
At least for me it’s harder to estimate big height differentials (viz Conan vs Leno) where the taller person’s advantage can tend to be over guessed or over claimed. As far as Conan’s height goes, I prefer guys who are closer to Conan’s range with their own reasonably confirmed heights like Selleck, Neeson, Goldblum, Lithgow, etc. For me, that allows for finer calibration and the conclusion that O’Brien is not 6’4” but maybe 6’3 1/2” at best. Just an opinion of course.
@Rory
Agreed. Both disproportionally long arms and/or legs can be revealing legacies of a once much taller person. Clint is an ideal example of same. TBH, Clint had a shorter than average torso to begin with but it has compressed that much more with the ensuing years combined with a number of worsening postural kinks.
I wonder what Clint weighs these days? Hard to say but I might guess 147 lbs to 154 lbs? Naturally, a llot of muscle and bone density has been lost.
@Hong
At least for me it’s harder to estimate big height differentials (viz Conan vs Leno) where the taller person’s advantage can tend to be over guessed or over claimed. As far as Conan’s height goes, I prefer guys who are closer to Conan’s range with their own reasonably confirmed heights like Selleck, Neeson, Goldblum, Lithgow, etc. For me, that allows for finer calibration and the conclusion that O’Brien is not 6’4” but maybe 6’3 1/2” at best. Just an opinion of course.
David Tang said on 23/Jul/21
6'4 peak. 6'0 now. hey rob. have you seen eastwood with schwarzenegger. these two both shrunk a ton. eastwood lost 3.5. schwarzenegger lost 2.5
Editor Rob
6'4 peak. 6'0 now. hey rob. have you seen eastwood with schwarzenegger. these two both shrunk a ton. eastwood lost 3.5. schwarzenegger lost 2.5
Editor RobEastwood has reached a good age, but the height loss is more than Arnie...
if Arnie reaches 90 though, I believe on this site there will be arguments whether he is 5ft 9 or 9.5!
if Arnie reaches 90 though, I believe on this site there will be arguments whether he is 5ft 9 or 9.5!
Tall In The Saddle said on 22/Jul/21
@Bruno
Yeah, I also estimate both Coop and Stewart to be over 6’3”, more likely closer to the 6’3 1/2” mark if not bang on. IMO Stewart def. had the edge on Coop as slight as it was and both guys could look equal to or slightly taller than The Duke at times.
Wayne def. taller than Scott also but I just think it was closer than the cowboy boot westerns suggest and certainly Scott wasn’t dropping 1 1/2” as this site’s listings imply. Interesting, when looking for same, there aren’t a lot of photos of Mel Ferrer with comparably tall actors. Found one with Coop, not the best but they appeared reasonably on par.
@Bruno
Yeah, I also estimate both Coop and Stewart to be over 6’3”, more likely closer to the 6’3 1/2” mark if not bang on. IMO Stewart def. had the edge on Coop as slight as it was and both guys could look equal to or slightly taller than The Duke at times.
Wayne def. taller than Scott also but I just think it was closer than the cowboy boot westerns suggest and certainly Scott wasn’t dropping 1 1/2” as this site’s listings imply. Interesting, when looking for same, there aren’t a lot of photos of Mel Ferrer with comparably tall actors. Found one with Coop, not the best but they appeared reasonably on par.
Hong said on 22/Jul/21
Click Here Jay Leno is listed here as 5ft11 peak,Here's Jay with Conan.Conan looks a comfortable 5 inches taller in fact he makes Jay look closer to 5ft10.
Click Here Jay Leno is listed here as 5ft11 peak,Here's Jay with Conan.Conan looks a comfortable 5 inches taller in fact he makes Jay look closer to 5ft10.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here I know this is Clint's page so I don't want to get immersed in a debate about Conan's height,but Here's Conan in 2009 with Dolph lundgren,if Conan was 6ft3.5 that would put Lundgren at 6ft1.5 max 6ft2 aged 52.Lundgren was still looking in the 6ft3 range at that stage,and was a solid 6ft4 peak.
Click Here I know this is Clint's page so I don't want to get immersed in a debate about Conan's height,but Here's Conan in 2009 with Dolph lundgren,if Conan was 6ft3.5 that would put Lundgren at 6ft1.5 max 6ft2 aged 52.Lundgren was still looking in the 6ft3 range at that stage,and was a solid 6ft4 peak.
Rory said on 21/Jul/21
You can see though in the photo with Kyle that his legs look the same length or longer than Kyle's,which is often a give away for older people who have lost height. Ive seen plenty of elderly guys out there really stooped and hunched over, but you can tell by their leg length that they were much taller in their youth. Clint now still has the legs of a 191cm guy but the torso of a guy whose about 174cm.
You can see though in the photo with Kyle that his legs look the same length or longer than Kyle's,which is often a give away for older people who have lost height. Ive seen plenty of elderly guys out there really stooped and hunched over, but you can tell by their leg length that they were much taller in their youth. Clint now still has the legs of a 191cm guy but the torso of a guy whose about 174cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 21/Jul/21
@Hong
Yeah, without any due nip and tuck for possible inequities, that photo in its own right might justify a 6’4” estimate for Conan but i wouldn’t say strong, rather, just on the mark. Of all the photos of the pair together, that photo suggests the biggest difference. Other photos indicate Will to be that bit closer in height I think.
@Hong
Yeah, without any due nip and tuck for possible inequities, that photo in its own right might justify a 6’4” estimate for Conan but i wouldn’t say strong, rather, just on the mark. Of all the photos of the pair together, that photo suggests the biggest difference. Other photos indicate Will to be that bit closer in height I think.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
@Canson,I have to disagree,even if Farrell stood straighter I still think Conan looks about 1.5 inches taller.
@Canson,I have to disagree,even if Farrell stood straighter I still think Conan looks about 1.5 inches taller.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.
Canson said on 20/Jul/21
@Hong: you can’t see anything below the shirts in that pic. But this one is more and this is more likely a 6’2.5 Farrell who is not standing as well as Conan. Conan looks 6’3.5 at best with him. That’s about what he most likely is given Hasselhoff and Neeson both being taller than him at 6’4”. also looks that with Barkley Kobe or Gronkowski
Click Here
@Hong: you can’t see anything below the shirts in that pic. But this one is more and this is more likely a 6’2.5 Farrell who is not standing as well as Conan. Conan looks 6’3.5 at best with him. That’s about what he most likely is given Hasselhoff and Neeson both being taller than him at 6’4”. also looks that with Barkley Kobe or Gronkowski
Click Here
Hong said on 20/Jul/21
Click Here On the subject of Conan,this is Conan with 6ft2.5 listed Will Ferrell,and remember Farrell is listed as 6ft3 peak,this is not a guy struggling with 6ft4,in fact Conan looks a clear 6ft4 in comparison to Farrell,unless of course Farrell is not as tall as he is listed.
Click Here On the subject of Conan,this is Conan with 6ft2.5 listed Will Ferrell,and remember Farrell is listed as 6ft3 peak,this is not a guy struggling with 6ft4,in fact Conan looks a clear 6ft4 in comparison to Farrell,unless of course Farrell is not as tall as he is listed.
Tall In The Saddle said on 20/Jul/21
@Hong
Yeah, that's the thing. Even if we're only a little bit out (albeit acceptably) on our estimates for each of the other individuals we can perhaps end up with an accumulated margin of error falling upon our target estimate (viz Clint) which may be quite off the mark. A Leaning Tower of Pisa so to speak. As cowboy boot heels go, Clint's appear regular I think, perhaps as minimal a cowboy boot heel could be. I recall Clint Walker's acute heel from SEND ME NO FLOWERS and they make Clint's cowboy heel look like a regular shoe heel. LOL. Aside from estimating their heights, which is really just a casual thing for me, I more enamored with the mere existence of the clip from the Danny Kaye show with such stars as Clint, Fess and Buddy. Awesome. There is also of course Clint's appearance on the FROST show which I had never seen until a few years ago. YouTube is a godsend.
@Hong
Yeah, that's the thing. Even if we're only a little bit out (albeit acceptably) on our estimates for each of the other individuals we can perhaps end up with an accumulated margin of error falling upon our target estimate (viz Clint) which may be quite off the mark. A Leaning Tower of Pisa so to speak. As cowboy boot heels go, Clint's appear regular I think, perhaps as minimal a cowboy boot heel could be. I recall Clint Walker's acute heel from SEND ME NO FLOWERS and they make Clint's cowboy heel look like a regular shoe heel. LOL. Aside from estimating their heights, which is really just a casual thing for me, I more enamored with the mere existence of the clip from the Danny Kaye show with such stars as Clint, Fess and Buddy. Awesome. There is also of course Clint's appearance on the FROST show which I had never seen until a few years ago. YouTube is a godsend.
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Jul/21
@Tall Sam
No prob bro. Clint and Conan might be among the more hotly contended height listings on this site but differences of opinion, equally valid, really only involve a general range of only 1/4" to 1/2" for either guy, either way. I guess, as per my own estimates, Clint's best case vs Conan's worst case might have them even. So, all things being equal on average I would give Conan the edge over Clint also.
@Tall Sam
No prob bro. Clint and Conan might be among the more hotly contended height listings on this site but differences of opinion, equally valid, really only involve a general range of only 1/4" to 1/2" for either guy, either way. I guess, as per my own estimates, Clint's best case vs Conan's worst case might have them even. So, all things being equal on average I would give Conan the edge over Clint also.
Hong said on 19/Jul/21
@ Tall In The Saddle,Good idea to post the Danny Kaye show video again.Parker is listed as 6ft5.5,taking in to account his footwear which seems quite flat,he would probably be standing around 6ft6 or max 6ft6.5,he looks to have about 3 inches on Clint,that would make Clint plus cowboy boots 6ft3.5,plus minus 1.5 inches for boots that would make Clint 6ft2 flat,now because we can't say exactly how high Clint's boots were or how tick Parkers footwear was and Clint did look similar to Ebsen who generally looked in the 6ft3 range,we will give Clint the benefit of the doubt.But this video definitely rules out 6ft4 for Clint's height unless Parker was 6ft7?Also Ebsen was in his late 50s at the time and my have lost a fraction of height by then.So Clint being below 6ft3 peak is not completely out of the question,so I think 6ft3 peak is more than fair.
@ Tall In The Saddle,Good idea to post the Danny Kaye show video again.Parker is listed as 6ft5.5,taking in to account his footwear which seems quite flat,he would probably be standing around 6ft6 or max 6ft6.5,he looks to have about 3 inches on Clint,that would make Clint plus cowboy boots 6ft3.5,plus minus 1.5 inches for boots that would make Clint 6ft2 flat,now because we can't say exactly how high Clint's boots were or how tick Parkers footwear was and Clint did look similar to Ebsen who generally looked in the 6ft3 range,we will give Clint the benefit of the doubt.But this video definitely rules out 6ft4 for Clint's height unless Parker was 6ft7?Also Ebsen was in his late 50s at the time and my have lost a fraction of height by then.So Clint being below 6ft3 peak is not completely out of the question,so I think 6ft3 peak is more than fair.
Tall Sam said on 18/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle, thanks for the nice comments. Yeah, I would say Conan is definitely a little taller peak, more of a legit 6’4” guy, although sometimes looks on the weak side for the mark. However, maybe it’s not as much as it seems because I believe I’ve seen Clint pull off 6’3.5” range at certain times.
@Tall in the Saddle, thanks for the nice comments. Yeah, I would say Conan is definitely a little taller peak, more of a legit 6’4” guy, although sometimes looks on the weak side for the mark. However, maybe it’s not as much as it seems because I believe I’ve seen Clint pull off 6’3.5” range at certain times.
James B 171.5cm said on 18/Jul/21
Rob I remember when you downgraded clints peak to 6’3.5 you said that would be the final peak height you would give him.
Does that rule out a future a downgrade to 6’3.25? From what I understand your not convinced he was just 6’3 flat in his prime
Rob I remember when you downgraded clints peak to 6’3.5 you said that would be the final peak height you would give him.
Does that rule out a future a downgrade to 6’3.25? From what I understand your not convinced he was just 6’3 flat in his prime
Dr Decker said on 17/Jul/21
Had an least inch on Lee van cleef. (6-2) legit imo peak.
Had an least inch on Lee van cleef. (6-2) legit imo peak.
James B 171.5cm said on 17/Jul/21
I don’t rule out 6’3.25 for clints peak
I don’t rule out 6’3.25 for clints peak
Tall In The Saddle said on 17/Jul/21
Here's a link to footage that was provided some time back on this thread. A good time for a refresh.
The Danny Kaye Show, host 5'11" listed Danny Kaye featuring 6'3 1/2" listed Clint, 6'5 1/2" listed Fess Parker and 6'3" listed Buddy Ebsen. Click Here
I will note that Buddy Ebsen once said that when he began filming the series Davy Crockett (series run '54 to '55), he himself stood 6'3 1/4" next to Fess' 6'5 1/2". The clip in question was filmed in 1965, some 10 year since that series with Buddy being aged 57 and heading into potential height loss territory if not already there.
Also, worthy to note that Ebsen began filming the Beverly Hillbillies in 1962. At that time, in comparable footwear, he appeared about 1" shorter than legit 6'4" Max Baer Jr. During the series run Ebsen's gradual loss of height could be observed and when the series wrapped in 1971, he was that little bit shorter again that Max Baer Jr.
At least in the opening sequences, Clint has the singular advantage of cowboy boot heel over Kaye, Buddy and Fess. IMO, even so, if not holding the slightest of edges, Clint appears about the same height as Ebsen and 2" plus shorter than Fess. He does appear an arguable 4" taller than Kaye, but that's at a max. So, all cross referencing appears to reconcile Clint to be standing manifestly at around the 6'3" mark but again, that's in cowboy boot heel.
In balance, there are many more examples in favor of 6'3" plus for Clint but I have to say that for the purposes of comparison this footage presents as perhaps the best quality evidence but not necessarily the be all and end all to the discussion.
Here's a link to footage that was provided some time back on this thread. A good time for a refresh.
The Danny Kaye Show, host 5'11" listed Danny Kaye featuring 6'3 1/2" listed Clint, 6'5 1/2" listed Fess Parker and 6'3" listed Buddy Ebsen. Click Here
I will note that Buddy Ebsen once said that when he began filming the series Davy Crockett (series run '54 to '55), he himself stood 6'3 1/4" next to Fess' 6'5 1/2". The clip in question was filmed in 1965, some 10 year since that series with Buddy being aged 57 and heading into potential height loss territory if not already there.
Also, worthy to note that Ebsen began filming the Beverly Hillbillies in 1962. At that time, in comparable footwear, he appeared about 1" shorter than legit 6'4" Max Baer Jr. During the series run Ebsen's gradual loss of height could be observed and when the series wrapped in 1971, he was that little bit shorter again that Max Baer Jr.
At least in the opening sequences, Clint has the singular advantage of cowboy boot heel over Kaye, Buddy and Fess. IMO, even so, if not holding the slightest of edges, Clint appears about the same height as Ebsen and 2" plus shorter than Fess. He does appear an arguable 4" taller than Kaye, but that's at a max. So, all cross referencing appears to reconcile Clint to be standing manifestly at around the 6'3" mark but again, that's in cowboy boot heel.
In balance, there are many more examples in favor of 6'3" plus for Clint but I have to say that for the purposes of comparison this footage presents as perhaps the best quality evidence but not necessarily the be all and end all to the discussion.
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jul/21
@James B@Hong
Gotcha. Thanks.
@James B@Hong
Gotcha. Thanks.
Hong said on 16/Jul/21
I've always seen Conan as a legitimate 6ft4.
I've always seen Conan as a legitimate 6ft4.
James B 171.5 said on 16/Jul/21
I mean taller than clint
I mean taller than clint
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jul/21
@James B
Re Conan, did you mean a little taller or shorter than Clint? I’m guessing you mean the former but not sure.
@James B
Re Conan, did you mean a little taller or shorter than Clint? I’m guessing you mean the former but not sure.
Canson said on 15/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle: all good my man! And I agree with what you eloquently said. I do take into consideration being I was once one of them, that those who see under 6’3 may be looking at later footage of him
@Tall in the Saddle: all good my man! And I agree with what you eloquently said. I do take into consideration being I was once one of them, that those who see under 6’3 may be looking at later footage of him
James B 171.5cm said on 15/Jul/21
Nah I always imaged Conan as a little than Clint
Nah I always imaged Conan as a little than Clint
Tall In The Saddle said on 15/Jul/21
@Canson
No drama but for clarity that be Tall Sam’s comment you replied to. Good to see the original Tall Man (and the best) posting again. My moniker has caused some confusion at times but I’ll always take any credit for Tall Sam’s wisdom. Lol.
As it happens I agree with both you guys though Clint’s television appearance beside Ebsen and Fess Parker had Clint, who was the only one wearing cowboy boots in the opening skits, curiously appearing to be barely scraping 6’3” and the vision was pretty good for comparison purposes. Hong knows of these examples and basing an opinion ONLY on then one might seriously submit an estimate a touch below 6’3”.
Also, next to Ali on the Frost show, It seemed Clint did edge Ali but only slightly but it still had to be a min. 1/2” advantage for it to be even discernible. Some might’ve seen a 1” advantage to Clint but personally I didn’t quite see that much, maybe 3/4” at best?.
However, I guess there is that much more weight of evidence for 6’3” + estimate, jus in my opinion. So yeah, a 6’3 1/4” to 6’3 1/2” sounds fair. Lol, as some of us have him, we could be talking Conan O’Brien instead of Clint. So I guess we’ve kind of got O’Brien and Eastwood more or less equal at their peaks. Clint would’ve also had Conan covered in terms of high hair.
@Canson
No drama but for clarity that be Tall Sam’s comment you replied to. Good to see the original Tall Man (and the best) posting again. My moniker has caused some confusion at times but I’ll always take any credit for Tall Sam’s wisdom. Lol.
As it happens I agree with both you guys though Clint’s television appearance beside Ebsen and Fess Parker had Clint, who was the only one wearing cowboy boots in the opening skits, curiously appearing to be barely scraping 6’3” and the vision was pretty good for comparison purposes. Hong knows of these examples and basing an opinion ONLY on then one might seriously submit an estimate a touch below 6’3”.
Also, next to Ali on the Frost show, It seemed Clint did edge Ali but only slightly but it still had to be a min. 1/2” advantage for it to be even discernible. Some might’ve seen a 1” advantage to Clint but personally I didn’t quite see that much, maybe 3/4” at best?.
However, I guess there is that much more weight of evidence for 6’3” + estimate, jus in my opinion. So yeah, a 6’3 1/4” to 6’3 1/2” sounds fair. Lol, as some of us have him, we could be talking Conan O’Brien instead of Clint. So I guess we’ve kind of got O’Brien and Eastwood more or less equal at their peaks. Clint would’ve also had Conan covered in terms of high hair.
Hong said on 15/Jul/21
@Canson,6ft3.25 is a fair assessment for Clint's peak,6ft4 morning height is probably closer to his peak, and 6ft3.25 standing tall for measurment in the evening.But he did have a bad habit of slouching which made him seem a tad shorter in pics for comparison with other actors.
@Canson,6ft3.25 is a fair assessment for Clint's peak,6ft4 morning height is probably closer to his peak, and 6ft3.25 standing tall for measurment in the evening.But he did have a bad habit of slouching which made him seem a tad shorter in pics for comparison with other actors.
Canson said on 15/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle: yea that’s where I would start is no less than 6’3 but a strong 6’3 like 6’3.25” is a good possibility. 6’3.5 is also possible peak height (afternoon/evening). But I believed at one time that he could’ve been somewhere around what Bobby said likely because I saw more of him after he begun to lose height.
@Tall in the Saddle: yea that’s where I would start is no less than 6’3 but a strong 6’3 like 6’3.25” is a good possibility. 6’3.5 is also possible peak height (afternoon/evening). But I believed at one time that he could’ve been somewhere around what Bobby said likely because I saw more of him after he begun to lose height.
Canson said on 14/Jul/21
@Hong: maybe not the classic 6’4” guy but Eastwood was at least a solid 6’3” at his peak. He could pass for 6’3.5 at times
@Hong: maybe not the classic 6’4” guy but Eastwood was at least a solid 6’3” at his peak. He could pass for 6’3.5 at times
Tall Sam said on 14/Jul/21
@Bobbyh3342, I'd be surprised if Eastwood at peak was not taller than Affleck, the latter is a slightly strong 6'2" whereas Clint usually managed to pull off 6'3" and change IMO. I could seem at times as low as 6'3", around the height of someone like Sacha Baron Cohen, for Eastwood.
@Bobbyh3342, I'd be surprised if Eastwood at peak was not taller than Affleck, the latter is a slightly strong 6'2" whereas Clint usually managed to pull off 6'3" and change IMO. I could seem at times as low as 6'3", around the height of someone like Sacha Baron Cohen, for Eastwood.
Rory said on 14/Jul/21
I dont really get people who say Eric Fleming was taller than Clint. From most of what ive seen of the two of them they look the same or if anything Clint looks taller.
I think for some people theyve kind of persuaded themselves that young Clint was 6ft2.75, and now search frantically to prove that theory, ignoring evidence to the contrary and relying on scarce, unreliable evidence to back up their claims. I think the most credible height guessers amongst us know Clint was 6ft3+.
I dont really get people who say Eric Fleming was taller than Clint. From most of what ive seen of the two of them they look the same or if anything Clint looks taller.
I think for some people theyve kind of persuaded themselves that young Clint was 6ft2.75, and now search frantically to prove that theory, ignoring evidence to the contrary and relying on scarce, unreliable evidence to back up their claims. I think the most credible height guessers amongst us know Clint was 6ft3+.
Tall In The Saddle said on 13/Jul/21
@Hong
To be clear, the photos you provide are fine, even handed without bias and are always definitely worthy for comparison purposes to some degree or another. Obviously we take what we can get, some photos being better than others, some requiring less account for variables such as footwear, surface, postures etc. The most recent photo is very good and, in its own right, suggests little to choose between Clint and Eric. Clint maybe slightly closer to camera and Eric perhaps could gain a touch more if he was fully straight. Still, not much in at all and it really requires a broad sampling to sort out who really has the edge, otherwise, so close to call maybe more practical to just call them even.
If you're interested, maybe pop up to John Wayne's page. I would be interested in your view on the most recently linked vision. If I get a chance, I'm going to link another clip from Big Jim McLain to compare Wayne against another costar.
@Hong
To be clear, the photos you provide are fine, even handed without bias and are always definitely worthy for comparison purposes to some degree or another. Obviously we take what we can get, some photos being better than others, some requiring less account for variables such as footwear, surface, postures etc. The most recent photo is very good and, in its own right, suggests little to choose between Clint and Eric. Clint maybe slightly closer to camera and Eric perhaps could gain a touch more if he was fully straight. Still, not much in at all and it really requires a broad sampling to sort out who really has the edge, otherwise, so close to call maybe more practical to just call them even.
If you're interested, maybe pop up to John Wayne's page. I would be interested in your view on the most recently linked vision. If I get a chance, I'm going to link another clip from Big Jim McLain to compare Wayne against another costar.
Sinclair said on 13/Jul/21
The more I see of Clint at peak, the more I deduce he was 6’3.5” maximum. I now agree if anyone was taller out of Fleming and Clint, it was probably Fleming. Fleming nearly always looked taller than Clint on Rawhide. However, I’d put them both at 6’3.5”. In the first episode of Rawhide, Fleming was clearly taller than 6’3” listed Frank Wilcox. Nowadays, Clint is shorter than Tom Hanks, so if Hanks is 5’11.5” now, Clint may well be struggling with 5’11” today.
The more I see of Clint at peak, the more I deduce he was 6’3.5” maximum. I now agree if anyone was taller out of Fleming and Clint, it was probably Fleming. Fleming nearly always looked taller than Clint on Rawhide. However, I’d put them both at 6’3.5”. In the first episode of Rawhide, Fleming was clearly taller than 6’3” listed Frank Wilcox. Nowadays, Clint is shorter than Tom Hanks, so if Hanks is 5’11.5” now, Clint may well be struggling with 5’11” today.
Tony G said on 13/Jul/21
Clint was more than 1.5 inches taller than 6'1" David Soul. Check out both of them standing together in the movie "Magnum Force."
Clint was more than 1.5 inches taller than 6'1" David Soul. Check out both of them standing together in the movie "Magnum Force."
Hong said on 13/Jul/21
@Bobbyh3342,you could be right,it is possible.
@Bobbyh3342,you could be right,it is possible.
Bobbyh3342 said on 13/Jul/21
clint eastwood is a classic 6 2.5 guy that claims 6'4 just like ben affleck,,, Clint was a legend and one of my favorite actors, but was never near 6'4 in his barefeet
clint eastwood is a classic 6 2.5 guy that claims 6'4 just like ben affleck,,, Clint was a legend and one of my favorite actors, but was never near 6'4 in his barefeet
Hong said on 13/Jul/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,you could be right about Fleming being a bit taller,and yes the pic was not the best for comparison.Ive posted another one which both guys are standing next to each other,it's very close Fleming my have a slight edge.It could be 1m90.5 for Clint and 1m9.5 for Fleming that's how close it looks to me.If Fleming was taller it was only marginal 1cm.
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,you could be right about Fleming being a bit taller,and yes the pic was not the best for comparison.Ive posted another one which both guys are standing next to each other,it's very close Fleming my have a slight edge.It could be 1m90.5 for Clint and 1m9.5 for Fleming that's how close it looks to me.If Fleming was taller it was only marginal 1cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 11/Jul/21
@Hong
Yeah, I know that photo. Of course Fleming is barefoot and standing on lower ground and next to Clint he is standing impossibly shorter than than we reasonably know him to be.
In the group photo the background wall is a stand out first reference point. Even with that, Arness isn’t standing as high as we know him to be IMO. Perhaps angle etc. and also Arness breaking posture somewhat. I think Fess held equal or better advantage over Clint as seen on television but we also know Arness was clearly taller than Fess. Also, Henry Calvin is standing too well next to Arness.
Agreed. When actors are close in height or even equal, the advantage will see saw due to slight surface, foot wear and posture inequities. Over the whole landscape I’d still give Fleming the edge.
The photo you provided my be among the best for comparison purposes. Acceptably flat surface, equally heeled cowboy boots assumed with Fleming holding the manifest edge. But also, Fleming’s head is on a slight tilt and his feet are spaced more than Clint’s, the latter actually standing pretty straight for a change. :)
@Hong
Yeah, I know that photo. Of course Fleming is barefoot and standing on lower ground and next to Clint he is standing impossibly shorter than than we reasonably know him to be.
In the group photo the background wall is a stand out first reference point. Even with that, Arness isn’t standing as high as we know him to be IMO. Perhaps angle etc. and also Arness breaking posture somewhat. I think Fess held equal or better advantage over Clint as seen on television but we also know Arness was clearly taller than Fess. Also, Henry Calvin is standing too well next to Arness.
Agreed. When actors are close in height or even equal, the advantage will see saw due to slight surface, foot wear and posture inequities. Over the whole landscape I’d still give Fleming the edge.
The photo you provided my be among the best for comparison purposes. Acceptably flat surface, equally heeled cowboy boots assumed with Fleming holding the manifest edge. But also, Fleming’s head is on a slight tilt and his feet are spaced more than Clint’s, the latter actually standing pretty straight for a change. :)
Hong said on 11/Jul/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,I don't know about Fleming being taller,remember this Pic? but that's like arguing who was taller Caine or Connery? both were so similar one could look taller than the other and sometimes but in general they both looked the same height.By the way in the pic I posted with Arness you can use the line in the wall behind them to gauge their heights.
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,I don't know about Fleming being taller,remember this Pic? but that's like arguing who was taller Caine or Connery? both were so similar one could look taller than the other and sometimes but in general they both looked the same height.By the way in the pic I posted with Arness you can use the line in the wall behind them to gauge their heights.
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Jul/21
@Hong
Again you’ve located another great, rarely seen photo.
Interesting that Arness appears to be standing that bit less than his true height. Remember how tall Fess Parker appeared next to Clint? Anyway, Fleming does look a bit taller than Clint. Over many photos and vision I would give Fleming the edge in general. The actor next to Arness is Henry Calvin who played Sergeant Garcia in the old Zorro series starring Guy Williams.
Williams was a rock solid 6’2” at the least IMO and Calvin never appeared more than 1” shorter.
@Hong
Again you’ve located another great, rarely seen photo.
Interesting that Arness appears to be standing that bit less than his true height. Remember how tall Fess Parker appeared next to Clint? Anyway, Fleming does look a bit taller than Clint. Over many photos and vision I would give Fleming the edge in general. The actor next to Arness is Henry Calvin who played Sergeant Garcia in the old Zorro series starring Guy Williams.
Williams was a rock solid 6’2” at the least IMO and Calvin never appeared more than 1” shorter.
Hong said on 9/Jul/21
Click Here Here's a pic With 6ft6 to 6ft7 range James Arness,once again it's a pity Arness is not standing next to Clint but Eric Fleming is and looks slightly taller but from other pic's I posted before that can flucttuat between Clint and Fleming,both guys are near enough the same height.But as you can see Arness 8s clearly the tallest on the pic.
Click Here Here's a pic With 6ft6 to 6ft7 range James Arness,once again it's a pity Arness is not standing next to Clint but Eric Fleming is and looks slightly taller but from other pic's I posted before that can flucttuat between Clint and Fleming,both guys are near enough the same height.But as you can see Arness 8s clearly the tallest on the pic.
Hong said on 7/Jul/21
@Tall In The Saddle,I didn't realise Lynn Redgrave was so tall,if she was 5ft10 then Sommer was still 6ft3 range next to her. Both clips,Clint with Sommer and Everett with Sommer are not the best for height comparison the angles are odd.I would be more inclined to go for 1m90.5 for Clint's peak and now he's looking in the 1m80cm, range he might be able to stretch to 1m83cm,but is consistently looking like a 1m 80cm guy in his early 90s.
@Tall In The Saddle,I didn't realise Lynn Redgrave was so tall,if she was 5ft10 then Sommer was still 6ft3 range next to her. Both clips,Clint with Sommer and Everett with Sommer are not the best for height comparison the angles are odd.I would be more inclined to go for 1m90.5 for Clint's peak and now he's looking in the 1m80cm, range he might be able to stretch to 1m83cm,but is consistently looking like a 1m 80cm guy in his early 90s.
Tall In The Saddle said on 7/Jul/21
@Hong
Yeah, still pics can sometimes be a bit deceiving. Angle isn't great, Sommers posture isn't as good as Everett's and he is older as we've said but then Sommers is in the foreground for some perceptual advantage. I found the live vision more revealing and I'd guess about 1" between them. Not at all improbable for Sommers to have lost 1/2" by that time to work back to a 6'3 1/2" peak. Then it comes back to how much we think he had on Clint, and again, their scene together unfortunately doesn't provide ideal proximity and angle but based on that vision in its own right, I agree that Sommers appeared to have the edge.
Interesting to note, the great actress Lynn Redgrave is also in the photo and her peak height is listed as 5'10", which I think is about right.
@Chaos
For Clint, I think 191 cm max. with 190.5 still possible. His standing, effective height is now below 6 feet I think but if straightened for a nano second, he might just make the 6 feet mark or barely below it.
@Hong
Yeah, still pics can sometimes be a bit deceiving. Angle isn't great, Sommers posture isn't as good as Everett's and he is older as we've said but then Sommers is in the foreground for some perceptual advantage. I found the live vision more revealing and I'd guess about 1" between them. Not at all improbable for Sommers to have lost 1/2" by that time to work back to a 6'3 1/2" peak. Then it comes back to how much we think he had on Clint, and again, their scene together unfortunately doesn't provide ideal proximity and angle but based on that vision in its own right, I agree that Sommers appeared to have the edge.
Interesting to note, the great actress Lynn Redgrave is also in the photo and her peak height is listed as 5'10", which I think is about right.
@Chaos
For Clint, I think 191 cm max. with 190.5 still possible. His standing, effective height is now below 6 feet I think but if straightened for a nano second, he might just make the 6 feet mark or barely below it.
slim 6'1 said on 7/Jul/21
Chaos,
I think 191 -181 is more probable
Chaos,
I think 191 -181 is more probable
Rory said on 6/Jul/21
Clints height today is impossible to guess really, theres no way of telling what a guy like him could measure compared to how he looks other than to say hed probably be between 5ft11 and six foot. His peak is also quite difficult to pin down because of loose posture, but then his thick hair kind of counteracted that too at times.
I could probably buy 6ft3.25 peak and 5ft11.5 today. I could never buy under 6ft3 anyway, and maybe 6ft3.5 as a maximum. Not so sure about that clip with Sommer, not exactly a good comparison, theyre not really in close proximity and the camera angle is a bit unorthodox.
Clints height today is impossible to guess really, theres no way of telling what a guy like him could measure compared to how he looks other than to say hed probably be between 5ft11 and six foot. His peak is also quite difficult to pin down because of loose posture, but then his thick hair kind of counteracted that too at times.
I could probably buy 6ft3.25 peak and 5ft11.5 today. I could never buy under 6ft3 anyway, and maybe 6ft3.5 as a maximum. Not so sure about that clip with Sommer, not exactly a good comparison, theyre not really in close proximity and the camera angle is a bit unorthodox.
Hong said on 6/Jul/21
Click Here @ Tall In The Saddle,Here's a pic from that movie and Everett definitely is the taller guy,Sommer at 66 years old would probably be less than peak,but it's all pointing to Clint being no more than 6ft3 peak maybe even 6ft2.75,or 1m90cm,I know that seems a bit controversial,but I think it's a possibility.
Click Here @ Tall In The Saddle,Here's a pic from that movie and Everett definitely is the taller guy,Sommer at 66 years old would probably be less than peak,but it's all pointing to Clint being no more than 6ft3 peak maybe even 6ft2.75,or 1m90cm,I know that seems a bit controversial,but I think it's a possibility.
Tall In The Saddle said on 6/Jul/21
@Hong
Thanks for the clip. I found a trailer for a movie THE NEXT BEST THING made in 2000. There’s a scene with Sommers and 6’4” listed Rupert Everett. Everett is clearly taller. The angles vary but at best Sommers appear perhaps 1” shy of Everett’s height. Of course Sommers age as as that time, 66 yo, has to be factored.
@Hong
Thanks for the clip. I found a trailer for a movie THE NEXT BEST THING made in 2000. There’s a scene with Sommers and 6’4” listed Rupert Everett. Everett is clearly taller. The angles vary but at best Sommers appear perhaps 1” shy of Everett’s height. Of course Sommers age as as that time, 66 yo, has to be factored.
ChaosControl 6'2.50 said on 6/Jul/21
What’s more likely,191 down to 181 or 192 down to 182?
What’s more likely,191 down to 181 or 192 down to 182?
Popper plop said on 4/Jul/21
Shrunk lots. Sub 6-0 imo now from a 6-3.5 peak
Shrunk lots. Sub 6-0 imo now from a 6-3.5 peak
Hong said on 4/Jul/21
Click Here In The Saddle,Here's the scene there in together in Dirty Harry,Sommer looks the taller guy but it's not100% clear because of the camera angles, so the still pic I posted is the best for comparison.
Click Here In The Saddle,Here's the scene there in together in Dirty Harry,Sommer looks the taller guy but it's not100% clear because of the camera angles, so the still pic I posted is the best for comparison.
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Jul/21
@Hong
Yeah, I remember that actor (Josef Sommer). Good actor. I recall he appeared in quite a few movies but I never knew his name. Agreed, he does look to have the edge on Clint, an edge you might guess to be at least 1/2" to be discernible. I found one other photo of them from the same movie and scene with the POV being from behind Clint's back and at least as I saw it, the edge appeared pretty much the same.
@Hong
Yeah, I remember that actor (Josef Sommer). Good actor. I recall he appeared in quite a few movies but I never knew his name. Agreed, he does look to have the edge on Clint, an edge you might guess to be at least 1/2" to be discernible. I found one other photo of them from the same movie and scene with the POV being from behind Clint's back and at least as I saw it, the edge appeared pretty much the same.
Hong said on 2/Jul/21
Click Here The guy with Clint is Josef Sommer he's listed as 6ft3.5 on line,U don't know much about him but he looked to have the edge on Clint in their scene together,he looks a bit taller than Clint in the pic.
Click Here The guy with Clint is Josef Sommer he's listed as 6ft3.5 on line,U don't know much about him but he looked to have the edge on Clint in their scene together,he looks a bit taller than Clint in the pic.
Tall In The Saddle said on 29/Jun/21
@Canson
I thought I was Robinson Crusoe re my estimate for McMahon. LOL.
He’s a great yardstick to measure against numerous Carson guests. There’s a clip of Eastwood appearing on Carson in 1973. Virtually every other celebrity clip will include the walk on and hand shake with Carson and sidekick McMahon. I couldn’t believe they edited out at Clint’s walk on and commenced the clip just as Clint was taking his seat. The full vision of 43 yo Clint’s appearance must be out there and would be very interesting to see.
@Canson
I thought I was Robinson Crusoe re my estimate for McMahon. LOL.
He’s a great yardstick to measure against numerous Carson guests. There’s a clip of Eastwood appearing on Carson in 1973. Virtually every other celebrity clip will include the walk on and hand shake with Carson and sidekick McMahon. I couldn’t believe they edited out at Clint’s walk on and commenced the clip just as Clint was taking his seat. The full vision of 43 yo Clint’s appearance must be out there and would be very interesting to see.
Dr Decker said on 29/Jun/21
6-3.5 peak
6-3.5 peak
Hong said on 28/Jun/21
I mentioned to post that on the Christopher Reeve page.
I mentioned to post that on the Christopher Reeve page.
Canson said on 28/Jun/21
@Tall in the Saddle: that’s where I would place McMahon too. 191-192 range. 6’3.5 is a good fit
@Tall in the Saddle: that’s where I would place McMahon too. 191-192 range. 6’3.5 is a good fit
Hong said on 28/Jun/21
Click Here Here's a good pic with Hackman,he's only looking about an inch taller here.
Click Here Here's a good pic with Hackman,he's only looking about an inch taller here.
Tall In The Saddle said on 27/Jun/21
@Hong
Not a great shot to judge Clint alongside Chris Isaac. I could only find one other which was equally poor. I dunno. As at 1993 I might afford Clint up to 6’2 1/2” given all stills and vision. Certainly, he was standing well clear if Gene Hackman who was possibly just 6’1” himself by that stafe.. I could link lots of photos to argue for it but realistically there are also a good number of photos to challenge it. There are somw pics from the 1993 Oscars in which Clint appears equal to or holding a slight edge over Morgan. Also, I’m not so sure that Morgan stood a flat 6’2” himself by then, perhaps a touch taller.
Clint also appeared on Carson in 1993 to discuss UNFORGIVEN.. I would estimate a 1/2” difference between he and Ed McMahon. IMO, McMahon was more like 6’3 1/2” peak and was perhaps down to 6’3” by 1993. Ali appeared on Carson a few times with McMahon clearly taller by at least 1/2”, probably a touch more.
Did Morgan ever appear on Carson? I dunno but it would be worthwhile checking to see how he himself might’ve stood next to McMahon.
@Hong
Not a great shot to judge Clint alongside Chris Isaac. I could only find one other which was equally poor. I dunno. As at 1993 I might afford Clint up to 6’2 1/2” given all stills and vision. Certainly, he was standing well clear if Gene Hackman who was possibly just 6’1” himself by that stafe.. I could link lots of photos to argue for it but realistically there are also a good number of photos to challenge it. There are somw pics from the 1993 Oscars in which Clint appears equal to or holding a slight edge over Morgan. Also, I’m not so sure that Morgan stood a flat 6’2” himself by then, perhaps a touch taller.
Clint also appeared on Carson in 1993 to discuss UNFORGIVEN.. I would estimate a 1/2” difference between he and Ed McMahon. IMO, McMahon was more like 6’3 1/2” peak and was perhaps down to 6’3” by 1993. Ali appeared on Carson a few times with McMahon clearly taller by at least 1/2”, probably a touch more.
Did Morgan ever appear on Carson? I dunno but it would be worthwhile checking to see how he himself might’ve stood next to McMahon.
Rory said on 26/Jun/21
I wouldn't say Morgan was taller than Clint in the early 90s. In fact my money would be on Clint measuring taller in the early 90s.Obviously in the last 20 yrs Morgan has consistently looked the taller and has held on to his height much better than Clint has.
Click Here
Click Here
A good 5 inches taller than Nicholson at the time too. Id say 6ft2.5 for Clint in the early 90s.
Click Here
I wouldn't say Morgan was taller than Clint in the early 90s. In fact my money would be on Clint measuring taller in the early 90s.Obviously in the last 20 yrs Morgan has consistently looked the taller and has held on to his height much better than Clint has.
Click Here
Click Here
A good 5 inches taller than Nicholson at the time too. Id say 6ft2.5 for Clint in the early 90s.
Click Here
Hong said on 26/Jun/21
Click Here Here's 63 year old Clint with 6ft.5 listed Chris Isaak,Clint was definitely no taller than 6ft2 in 1993 around the time of Unforgivin,so him and Freeman would have been the same height at that time but Clint was definitely not taller.
Click Here Here's 63 year old Clint with 6ft.5 listed Chris Isaak,Clint was definitely no taller than 6ft2 in 1993 around the time of Unforgivin,so him and Freeman would have been the same height at that time but Clint was definitely not taller.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21
@Hong
Yeah my recollection of the movie matches your descriptions but I just saw it a bit different on rewatch, note ing how much even slight angle changes could alter how tall they appeared. Also back then Clint lost a bit in relaxed posture but every now and then he’d manage to stand straight. As at least 1993 I have Clint at about 6’2 1/2” so he could only be shorter if anything by the time of the movie.
People got away with platforms in the 70s because they were a big part of the fashion landscape so I guess some less tall folk took gained some advantage without standing out too much. But then if everyone was wearing them the advantage was cancelled out. LOL. But I agree our man Clint wasn’t given to extra heel..
Also I don’t know that Cromwell had Clint by a full 4” but then Cromwell himself might’ve been down from his peak 6’6 1/2”.
As to Morgan, when I first saw him in movies I would have probably guessed solid 6’3”.
@Hong
Yeah my recollection of the movie matches your descriptions but I just saw it a bit different on rewatch, note ing how much even slight angle changes could alter how tall they appeared. Also back then Clint lost a bit in relaxed posture but every now and then he’d manage to stand straight. As at least 1993 I have Clint at about 6’2 1/2” so he could only be shorter if anything by the time of the movie.
People got away with platforms in the 70s because they were a big part of the fashion landscape so I guess some less tall folk took gained some advantage without standing out too much. But then if everyone was wearing them the advantage was cancelled out. LOL. But I agree our man Clint wasn’t given to extra heel..
Also I don’t know that Cromwell had Clint by a full 4” but then Cromwell himself might’ve been down from his peak 6’6 1/2”.
As to Morgan, when I first saw him in movies I would have probably guessed solid 6’3”.
Hong said on 25/Jun/21
At the time Dirty Harry was made,platform heels were in fashion,a lot of men wore them so Clint would have been at a disadvantage in his regular heeld shoes on many occasions,some of those platform heels could be as high as 3 inches,just look at Kojac,Telly Savalas wore massive ones in that series . It's just a point that people don't usually think about.
At the time Dirty Harry was made,platform heels were in fashion,a lot of men wore them so Clint would have been at a disadvantage in his regular heeld shoes on many occasions,some of those platform heels could be as high as 3 inches,just look at Kojac,Telly Savalas wore massive ones in that series . It's just a point that people don't usually think about.
Hong said on 25/Jun/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,It looked to me that Sutherland was taller than Clint in Space Cowboys,Clint was looking in the 6ft1 to 6ft2 range at age 70,he was only marginally taller than 6ft Tommy Lee Jones and looked a good 4 inches shorter than 6ft6 James Cromwell,but the one who looked shortest was James Garner he looked around the 5ft11 range,considering he was 6ft1.5 at peak he looks to have lost over 2 inches by age 72.As for Morgan Freeman it's frustrating that there are no good comparison's between Clint and Morgan in Unforgiven,my own personal opinion is that Clint and Morgan would have been similar in height at the time,Morgan can look 6ft3 sometimes like in the movie Street Smart he was only a fraction shorter than 6ft3.5 Christopher Reeve.IMO even at their peaks Clint and Morgan would have been very close in height,maybe with Clint having a slight edge,but that's only because Clint was listed 6ft4 and Morgan 6ft2,but I think 6ft2.75 for Morgan and 6ft3 for Clint were more their acutal heights.I just posted the pic from dirty Harry just to show the footwear Clint wore during that movie,some people seem to think he was always in Cowboy boots.There just a standard heel problem Couple of cm.
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,It looked to me that Sutherland was taller than Clint in Space Cowboys,Clint was looking in the 6ft1 to 6ft2 range at age 70,he was only marginally taller than 6ft Tommy Lee Jones and looked a good 4 inches shorter than 6ft6 James Cromwell,but the one who looked shortest was James Garner he looked around the 5ft11 range,considering he was 6ft1.5 at peak he looks to have lost over 2 inches by age 72.As for Morgan Freeman it's frustrating that there are no good comparison's between Clint and Morgan in Unforgiven,my own personal opinion is that Clint and Morgan would have been similar in height at the time,Morgan can look 6ft3 sometimes like in the movie Street Smart he was only a fraction shorter than 6ft3.5 Christopher Reeve.IMO even at their peaks Clint and Morgan would have been very close in height,maybe with Clint having a slight edge,but that's only because Clint was listed 6ft4 and Morgan 6ft2,but I think 6ft2.75 for Morgan and 6ft3 for Clint were more their acutal heights.I just posted the pic from dirty Harry just to show the footwear Clint wore during that movie,some people seem to think he was always in Cowboy boots.There just a standard heel problem Couple of cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21
@Arch
Whoa! Redmond is only 36 yo but looks a lot older. A shame. Besides all else, he's lived a pretty hard life, including heroin use and jail time. I don't believe in people blaming their parents for what they become. At some point, you take the reins on your own life, assume responsibility and navigate your own course. I mean, the parents can reach back too and blame it on their own upbringing. Such lack of accountability would never stop and only serve to excuse negative repetition. For some, early life hardships in fact turn them into better people. Having said that, I don't think Ryan O'Neal would've ever been considered for Father of the Year. I mean, he's been estranged from most of his children at one time or another and they all seem to point to psychological scarring from their childhoods, underscored by O'Neal's chronic cheating. Ryan O'Neal always struck me as a non charitable, totally self centered, egotistical individual for whom children were a mere by product. I think both Tatum and Griffin were born to Joanna Moore who wasn't a bad looker in her day. Redmond of course was born to Farrah Fawcett who I personally didn't find particularly attractive but I know millions did and good luck to her for that. Out of the Angels, I was a Jaclyn Smith fan, she was beautiful but even she is looking a bit" not of this earth" these days. Too much knife work.
@Arch
Whoa! Redmond is only 36 yo but looks a lot older. A shame. Besides all else, he's lived a pretty hard life, including heroin use and jail time. I don't believe in people blaming their parents for what they become. At some point, you take the reins on your own life, assume responsibility and navigate your own course. I mean, the parents can reach back too and blame it on their own upbringing. Such lack of accountability would never stop and only serve to excuse negative repetition. For some, early life hardships in fact turn them into better people. Having said that, I don't think Ryan O'Neal would've ever been considered for Father of the Year. I mean, he's been estranged from most of his children at one time or another and they all seem to point to psychological scarring from their childhoods, underscored by O'Neal's chronic cheating. Ryan O'Neal always struck me as a non charitable, totally self centered, egotistical individual for whom children were a mere by product. I think both Tatum and Griffin were born to Joanna Moore who wasn't a bad looker in her day. Redmond of course was born to Farrah Fawcett who I personally didn't find particularly attractive but I know millions did and good luck to her for that. Out of the Angels, I was a Jaclyn Smith fan, she was beautiful but even she is looking a bit" not of this earth" these days. Too much knife work.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21
@Hong
Yeah, some photos are confusing. I don't think it just comes down to angles with a regular lens. It seems, for the sake of creativity and/or fitting in to frame, they use semi fish eye lens' or what not, creating surreal framing and presentation. Clearly, photographers and video makers are not on board with or interested in our goals to estimate height. LOL.
At least during and since UNFORGIVEN, Clint might've been shorter than Morgan. They were never framed in the above movie to allow for a realistic estimate though some still shots could make them either appear equal or give Morgan the edge.
The movie SPACE COWBOYS was replayed the other night. Interesting to see, while the actors held their position and the camera rotated, the illusory change in apparent height advantages or disadvantages. Watching the film overall, you could get a fair impression of their heights but in any given moment, if a still photo was taken or you paused the video, you could easily get a false perception. We're sort of mainly confined to still pics on this forum and we try to offer reasonably true camera views as single points in time evidence. However, I personally find live vision of reasonable duration as a better source for estimations.
Having said that, in SPACE COWBOYS, my memory had Clint notably shorter than Sutherland. Upon seeing the film again, Clint wasn't standing too badly though Sutherland did manage to out slouch Clint. No mean feat. Anyway, it seemed at different times they shared either equal advantage or disadvantage while otherwise they appeared quite comparable.
@Hong
Yeah, some photos are confusing. I don't think it just comes down to angles with a regular lens. It seems, for the sake of creativity and/or fitting in to frame, they use semi fish eye lens' or what not, creating surreal framing and presentation. Clearly, photographers and video makers are not on board with or interested in our goals to estimate height. LOL.
At least during and since UNFORGIVEN, Clint might've been shorter than Morgan. They were never framed in the above movie to allow for a realistic estimate though some still shots could make them either appear equal or give Morgan the edge.
The movie SPACE COWBOYS was replayed the other night. Interesting to see, while the actors held their position and the camera rotated, the illusory change in apparent height advantages or disadvantages. Watching the film overall, you could get a fair impression of their heights but in any given moment, if a still photo was taken or you paused the video, you could easily get a false perception. We're sort of mainly confined to still pics on this forum and we try to offer reasonably true camera views as single points in time evidence. However, I personally find live vision of reasonable duration as a better source for estimations.
Having said that, in SPACE COWBOYS, my memory had Clint notably shorter than Sutherland. Upon seeing the film again, Clint wasn't standing too badly though Sutherland did manage to out slouch Clint. No mean feat. Anyway, it seemed at different times they shared either equal advantage or disadvantage while otherwise they appeared quite comparable.
Hong said on 24/Jun/21
Click Here @Rob,yeah Here's a pic from the same event,now Morgan is taller.
Editor Rob
Click Here @Rob,yeah Here's a pic from the same event,now Morgan is taller.
Editor Robyeah in a few photos it seems more obvious Morgan was taller than Clint a good inch or so
Hong said on 23/Jun/21
Click Here @Rob this pic always puzzles me,at the time it was taken Morgan always seemed to have about an inch on Clint,but in this one it is reversed,I would be interested to know your opinion on this.
Editor Rob
Click Here @Rob this pic always puzzles me,at the time it was taken Morgan always seemed to have about an inch on Clint,but in this one it is reversed,I would be interested to know your opinion on this.
Editor Robcould be Morgan standing with looser posture
Arch Stanton said on 23/Jun/21
Agreed, many celebrities tend to be much better looking than their children though we tend to forget how much surgery or pampering they've had to look that good, David Beckham is a good example. Some celebs who were very good looking couples sometimes even have very average to ugly children. Ryan O'Neal and Farrah Fawcett's son Click Here looks like a carpet fitter from Pontypridd LOL.
Agreed, many celebrities tend to be much better looking than their children though we tend to forget how much surgery or pampering they've had to look that good, David Beckham is a good example. Some celebs who were very good looking couples sometimes even have very average to ugly children. Ryan O'Neal and Farrah Fawcett's son Click Here looks like a carpet fitter from Pontypridd LOL.
Tall In The Saddle said on 21/Jun/21
On the flip side, sometimes the good looking genes of celebrity parents don’t necessarily pass down or combine for equally good looking offspring. Sometimes, the kids don’t even come close.
Then there are those kids born to already heavily faced lifted celebrity and parents, including perfectly tweaked noses. They might be like, “Where the hell did I get this huge proboscis from?”
On the flip side, sometimes the good looking genes of celebrity parents don’t necessarily pass down or combine for equally good looking offspring. Sometimes, the kids don’t even come close.
Then there are those kids born to already heavily faced lifted celebrity and parents, including perfectly tweaked noses. They might be like, “Where the hell did I get this huge proboscis from?”
Hong said on 19/Jun/21
I think the article saying he's 6ft3 was the truth.
I think the article saying he's 6ft3 was the truth.
Hong said on 17/Jun/21
@Pierre,the John Wayne pic is just not a good pic for height comparison unfortunately,but I do agree that Wayne would have been closer to 6ft4 at peak than Clint,who was more a in the 6ft3 range.
@Pierre,the John Wayne pic is just not a good pic for height comparison unfortunately,but I do agree that Wayne would have been closer to 6ft4 at peak than Clint,who was more a in the 6ft3 range.
Arch Stanton said on 16/Jun/21
I wouldn't have been able to guess those were Clint's parents from a photo though. Doesn't look much like them at all. Clint's dad looks more like Bing Crosby! Some celebs I've noticed have been extremely lucky and end up much better looking than you'd expect from a set of genes.
I wouldn't have been able to guess those were Clint's parents from a photo though. Doesn't look much like them at all. Clint's dad looks more like Bing Crosby! Some celebs I've noticed have been extremely lucky and end up much better looking than you'd expect from a set of genes.
Hong said on 16/Jun/21
@Tall In The Saddle,Yeah the perants don't seem to impressed by the whole Hollywood thing.
@Tall In The Saddle,Yeah the perants don't seem to impressed by the whole Hollywood thing.
Pierre said on 15/Jun/21
Pics on 19/May/21 = In this famous pic Clint /John Wayne ,even if probably John stands closer to the camera than Clint you can see Clint is looking up to talk to John while John is looking down,then imo very probably John had Clint by a good inch here.John was probably in cow boy boots next to Clint but also very probably same thing next to Rock Hudson, who still loks comfortably taller than John in this pics.
Pics on 19/May/21 = In this famous pic Clint /John Wayne ,even if probably John stands closer to the camera than Clint you can see Clint is looking up to talk to John while John is looking down,then imo very probably John had Clint by a good inch here.John was probably in cow boy boots next to Clint but also very probably same thing next to Rock Hudson, who still loks comfortably taller than John in this pics.
James B 171.5 said on 15/Jun/21
David Beckhams parents are not the most glamorous of people either and he look how he turned out.
Weird genetics
David Beckhams parents are not the most glamorous of people either and he look how he turned out.
Weird genetics
Tall In The Saddle said on 15/Jun/21
@Hong
LOL, yeah, looks like Clint got an optimum combo of his parents features. I can’t say he looks more like either one but I can see him in both parents.. Good point re his Dad’s height. Very solid 6 footer at the least. Funny how legendary Ginger Rogers is standing at the end as if she is no one of great importance while the parents look somewhat underwhelmed standing alongside a Hollywood great. Their expressions seem to suggest a very practical, no nonsense couple.
@Hong
LOL, yeah, looks like Clint got an optimum combo of his parents features. I can’t say he looks more like either one but I can see him in both parents.. Good point re his Dad’s height. Very solid 6 footer at the least. Funny how legendary Ginger Rogers is standing at the end as if she is no one of great importance while the parents look somewhat underwhelmed standing alongside a Hollywood great. Their expressions seem to suggest a very practical, no nonsense couple.
Hong said on 15/Jun/21
Lucky Clint didn't inherit his dads ears😄,both his perants aren't exactly the most glamorous of individuals,his Dad looks very serious also he looks like a solid 6footer which was tall for his generation.
Lucky Clint didn't inherit his dads ears😄,both his perants aren't exactly the most glamorous of individuals,his Dad looks very serious also he looks like a solid 6footer which was tall for his generation.
Tall In The Saddle said on 13/Jun/21
@Hong
Got to say it again. You get your hands own some great, less frequently seen photos. Clint’s dad was a very serious looking dude. LOL.
@Hong
Got to say it again. You get your hands own some great, less frequently seen photos. Clint’s dad was a very serious looking dude. LOL.
Slim 6'1.5 said on 9/Jun/21
191-191.5 for peak 192 is too high and 190 is too low
👍
191-191.5 for peak 192 is too high and 190 is too low
👍
Slim 6'1.5 said on 9/Jun/21
Below 6ft current
These days he’d be 181-182
Below 6ft current
These days he’d be 181-182
Hong said on 7/Jun/21
Click Here Clint was 73 years old in this pic with 5ft11 Sting,he looks about 6ft1.5 in comparison,he wouldn't have lost much more than a inch at that stage.
Click Here Clint was 73 years old in this pic with 5ft11 Sting,he looks about 6ft1.5 in comparison,he wouldn't have lost much more than a inch at that stage.
Lava said on 4/Jun/21
193.3-193.4 cm. out of bed. 191.3-191.4 cm. before bed. peak. 185 cm. out of bed. 183 cm. before bed. now.
193.3-193.4 cm. out of bed. 191.3-191.4 cm. before bed. peak. 185 cm. out of bed. 183 cm. before bed. now.
Hong said on 2/Jun/21
Click Here Here's Santoni next to an actor named Arthur Hill,he's listed as 6ft3 on line also Lee Majors who's around 5ft11.I don't know much about Arthur Hill except he towerd Paul Newman in, I think the movie was Harper?He looked a tall guy anyway.
Click Here Here's Santoni next to an actor named Arthur Hill,he's listed as 6ft3 on line also Lee Majors who's around 5ft11.I don't know much about Arthur Hill except he towerd Paul Newman in, I think the movie was Harper?He looked a tall guy anyway.
Hong said on 2/Jun/21
Santoni at 6ft1 puts Clint into the 6ft3 range Rob,he didn't look over 2 inches taller than Santoni.
Santoni at 6ft1 puts Clint into the 6ft3 range Rob,he didn't look over 2 inches taller than Santoni.
Hong said on 31/May/21
Clint's 91 today,so happy birthday Mr Eastwood,6ft3.25 peak and now 5ft11.25,four inches lost.
Clint's 91 today,so happy birthday Mr Eastwood,6ft3.25 peak and now 5ft11.25,four inches lost.
Sinclair said on 31/May/21
Rob, how tall would you say Reni Santoni was?
I would say at least 6’1”, maybe 6’1.5”, he only seemed an inch or two shorter than Eastwood in Dirty Harry. And Happy 91st Birthday, Clint.
Editor Rob
Rob, how tall would you say Reni Santoni was?
I would say at least 6’1”, maybe 6’1.5”, he only seemed an inch or two shorter than Eastwood in Dirty Harry. And Happy 91st Birthday, Clint.
Editor RobAbout 6ft 1
Hong said on 24/May/21
Click Here @JamesB171.5cm,Here's Clint looking a more convincing 6ft3 with Holbrook,but your right sometimes he was looking under 6ft3 particularly in walking scenes in comparison to Holbrook.
Click Here @JamesB171.5cm,Here's Clint looking a more convincing 6ft3 with Holbrook,but your right sometimes he was looking under 6ft3 particularly in walking scenes in comparison to Holbrook.
Hotspots said on 22/May/21
6-3 minimum peak. Probably 6.3.5. Now weak 6-0
6-3 minimum peak. Probably 6.3.5. Now weak 6-0
Tall In The Saddle said on 22/May/21
@Hong
Oh I agree with your rationale. My core point was, at least imo, in the scene with Hudson. Clint was def. standing taller than his true height. For sure a bit player, Clint wasn’t even credited in that film so there was no deference to Clint himself or star power to speak of. I entertained two possibilities. On the outside chance they might’ve had Clint boosted just for the sake of framing. True, unlikely as Clint’s actual height would’ve had him standing sufficiently tall. Otherwise, Clint self boosted to ensure he stood near on par with an actor of even more uncommon height, something Clint wouldn’t have encountered too often.
The Wayne Eastwood photo is interesting. Taken on the set of the Shootist 1976. In that film, even in cowboy boots Wayne could appear to be edged by costar James Stewart who wore dress shoes. So Wayne def. has too much height on Clint in that photo. So yeah, cowboy boots vs Clint in flats might explain it in part but I also have a hunch that Wayne is standing on slightly raised flooring with a small step up to same, not uncommon on the era related set. Finally, Wayne is of course closer to camera and Clint’s posture is inferior.
All things equal, by 1976, given how well Stewart stood next to Wayne, I think Clint might’ve also had the edge on a height shrunken Wayne.
@Hong
Oh I agree with your rationale. My core point was, at least imo, in the scene with Hudson. Clint was def. standing taller than his true height. For sure a bit player, Clint wasn’t even credited in that film so there was no deference to Clint himself or star power to speak of. I entertained two possibilities. On the outside chance they might’ve had Clint boosted just for the sake of framing. True, unlikely as Clint’s actual height would’ve had him standing sufficiently tall. Otherwise, Clint self boosted to ensure he stood near on par with an actor of even more uncommon height, something Clint wouldn’t have encountered too often.
The Wayne Eastwood photo is interesting. Taken on the set of the Shootist 1976. In that film, even in cowboy boots Wayne could appear to be edged by costar James Stewart who wore dress shoes. So Wayne def. has too much height on Clint in that photo. So yeah, cowboy boots vs Clint in flats might explain it in part but I also have a hunch that Wayne is standing on slightly raised flooring with a small step up to same, not uncommon on the era related set. Finally, Wayne is of course closer to camera and Clint’s posture is inferior.
All things equal, by 1976, given how well Stewart stood next to Wayne, I think Clint might’ve also had the edge on a height shrunken Wayne.
Hong said on 21/May/21
@Tall In The Saddle,with the greatest respect,at the time of the movie with Rock,Clint was an unknown bit player actor I doubt if they would have engineered that scene around Clint's height as to make him look similar in height to Hudson,if anything Clint may have worn bigger heeld shoe's so as to look as tall as Rock.My own opinion is even in that scene if both guy's were standing beside each other, Rock would be the taller guy,it's not a great scene for compering their heights.If anything it just demonstrates Clint was a tall guy and has indeed lost a lot of height because people are even debating weather he was the same height as Rock Hudson,the same debate now with 90 year old Clint being as tall as, say Vince Vaughan would be laughable.@Pirre,the John Wayne Clint pic is not the best for compering Clint and Wayne's height.Wayne looks to be in his full Western costume which no doubt includes cowboy boots,Clint is more than likely in flat or normal footwear,but Wayne would have edged Clint anyway,but in that pic Clint is looking around 6ft1.5 in comparison? which I doubt he was,because he looked to be a similar height difference betweent Clint and Lee Marvin in Paint Your Wagon compered to Wayne and Lee Marvin in Donovan Reef.
@Tall In The Saddle,with the greatest respect,at the time of the movie with Rock,Clint was an unknown bit player actor I doubt if they would have engineered that scene around Clint's height as to make him look similar in height to Hudson,if anything Clint may have worn bigger heeld shoe's so as to look as tall as Rock.My own opinion is even in that scene if both guy's were standing beside each other, Rock would be the taller guy,it's not a great scene for compering their heights.If anything it just demonstrates Clint was a tall guy and has indeed lost a lot of height because people are even debating weather he was the same height as Rock Hudson,the same debate now with 90 year old Clint being as tall as, say Vince Vaughan would be laughable.@Pirre,the John Wayne Clint pic is not the best for compering Clint and Wayne's height.Wayne looks to be in his full Western costume which no doubt includes cowboy boots,Clint is more than likely in flat or normal footwear,but Wayne would have edged Clint anyway,but in that pic Clint is looking around 6ft1.5 in comparison? which I doubt he was,because he looked to be a similar height difference betweent Clint and Lee Marvin in Paint Your Wagon compered to Wayne and Lee Marvin in Donovan Reef.
James B 171.5cm said on 20/May/21
Rob how tall do you think clint looks here compared to 6ft listed Hal Halbrook? Click Here
Editor Rob
Rob how tall do you think clint looks here compared to 6ft listed Hal Halbrook? Click Here
Editor Rob6ft 2.5-3 there
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/May/21
In respect of Clint's appearance on screen alongside Rock Hudson I think we can confidently say that is at least one time Clint's height was given a bit of boost for whatever motive(s). Clint appears nearly on par with Rock and photos otherwise suggest that was not the case. I also don't believe Clint was prone to "lifting" so I think it unlikley (though possible that one time to maintain the status quo since Clint was widely touted as 6'4" himself) that Clint appearing to be virtually the same height as Rock was driven by personal ego or such, rather, possibly just for filming aesthetics etc. and under direction.
In respect of Clint's appearance on screen alongside Rock Hudson I think we can confidently say that is at least one time Clint's height was given a bit of boost for whatever motive(s). Clint appears nearly on par with Rock and photos otherwise suggest that was not the case. I also don't believe Clint was prone to "lifting" so I think it unlikley (though possible that one time to maintain the status quo since Clint was widely touted as 6'4" himself) that Clint appearing to be virtually the same height as Rock was driven by personal ego or such, rather, possibly just for filming aesthetics etc. and under direction.
Height_Guesser said on 19/May/21
6’ 3 1/2” (192 cm) peak and now is 5’ 11 1/2” (182 cm). A 4 inch height loss. I think Clint was at his peak height until the late 1980s. I think by the late 80s he was a little over 6’ 3” flat. By the mid 90s he was around 6’ 2 1/2” and by the late 90s he was about 6’ 2” flat. By the late 2000s he was around 6’ 3/4” and by the mid 2010s he dipped to just 6’ flat and now in 2021 is in the 5’ 11 1/2” range.
6’ 3 1/2” (192 cm) peak and now is 5’ 11 1/2” (182 cm). A 4 inch height loss. I think Clint was at his peak height until the late 1980s. I think by the late 80s he was a little over 6’ 3” flat. By the mid 90s he was around 6’ 2 1/2” and by the late 90s he was about 6’ 2” flat. By the late 2000s he was around 6’ 3/4” and by the mid 2010s he dipped to just 6’ flat and now in 2021 is in the 5’ 11 1/2” range.
Pierre said on 19/May/21
Click Here Here is Rock Hudson next to John Wayne
Click Here = John Wayne slouching in this pic.
Click Here Click Here Clint/John
Click Here Here is Rock Hudson next to John Wayne
Click Here = John Wayne slouching in this pic.
Click Here Click Here Clint/John
Hong said on 17/May/21
@Parker Clint did look to have the edge on Heston,and Rock at the end credits looked near 6ft5 in comparison to 6ft2 Michael caine.
@Parker Clint did look to have the edge on Heston,and Rock at the end credits looked near 6ft5 in comparison to 6ft2 Michael caine.
Parker said on 17/May/21
@Hong
I've seen a number of interviews with Rock Hudson where he is complaining of being too tall at 6'5. I also note from a quote from an actor on his page that he (the actor) felt Rock was underplaying his height at 6'5.
Good clip you posted of the 73 Oscars on the Hudson page. I noticed Clint looking taller than Charlton Heston in that.
@Hong
I've seen a number of interviews with Rock Hudson where he is complaining of being too tall at 6'5. I also note from a quote from an actor on his page that he (the actor) felt Rock was underplaying his height at 6'5.
Good clip you posted of the 73 Oscars on the Hudson page. I noticed Clint looking taller than Charlton Heston in that.
Hong said on 17/May/21
@Rory,Your right about Palmer,I've not researched Palmers height,I've seen a few pics of him and he looks an average sized guy to me,and of course the angel not great and Clint's posture.But your wrong I actually guessed Clint's peak as 6ft3.25,but sometimes I just think he looks under 6ft3,but in general he looks around the 6ft3 mark.
@Rory,Your right about Palmer,I've not researched Palmers height,I've seen a few pics of him and he looks an average sized guy to me,and of course the angel not great and Clint's posture.But your wrong I actually guessed Clint's peak as 6ft3.25,but sometimes I just think he looks under 6ft3,but in general he looks around the 6ft3 mark.
Hong said on 15/May/21
@Parker Here's a pic of Clint and Rock I posted earlier,as I said befor Rock is listed from 6ft3.5 to as tall as 6ft6,if he was 6ft5 then Clint does indeed look 6ft3.5 in comparison,but IMO Rock was 6ft4.5.The Clip of Urich and Matheson,Clint looks a bit taller if those two guys were 6ft2 Clint looks about 6ft3 in comparison Click Here
@Parker Here's a pic of Clint and Rock I posted earlier,as I said befor Rock is listed from 6ft3.5 to as tall as 6ft6,if he was 6ft5 then Clint does indeed look 6ft3.5 in comparison,but IMO Rock was 6ft4.5.The Clip of Urich and Matheson,Clint looks a bit taller if those two guys were 6ft2 Clint looks about 6ft3 in comparison Click Here
Rory said on 15/May/21
@Hong
Yh but you have to understand a picture of two people walking in mid stride, at an obscure angle, on an uneven surface like grass, and with one of the men, Clint, with his head down isnt great for height comparisons to say the least. Not to mention the fact I doubt youve researched Arnold Palmers height in any detail? Look, I get the impression you think Clint was a 6ft2.75 guy peak, fair enough, I dont happen to think that. I think Clint was minimum 6ft3.25 with this 6ft3.5 listing also reasonable.
@Hong
Yh but you have to understand a picture of two people walking in mid stride, at an obscure angle, on an uneven surface like grass, and with one of the men, Clint, with his head down isnt great for height comparisons to say the least. Not to mention the fact I doubt youve researched Arnold Palmers height in any detail? Look, I get the impression you think Clint was a 6ft2.75 guy peak, fair enough, I dont happen to think that. I think Clint was minimum 6ft3.25 with this 6ft3.5 listing also reasonable.
Parker said on 14/May/21
Posted before, but again at ~ 1 minute Clint and Rock Hudson
Click Here
Clint as listed IMO
Posted before, but again at ~ 1 minute Clint and Rock Hudson
Click Here
Clint as listed IMO
Parker said on 14/May/21
I know this clip has been posted before, but clearly looking taller than 6'2 listed Robert Urich and Tim Matheson towards the end of the scene,
Click Here
@Rob - Guess doesn't allow 6'2 peak height.
I know this clip has been posted before, but clearly looking taller than 6'2 listed Robert Urich and Tim Matheson towards the end of the scene,
Click Here
@Rob - Guess doesn't allow 6'2 peak height.
Hong said on 14/May/21
@Rory I respect your opinion,but I'd guess 6ft3 max for Clint's peak,he could have measured near 6ft4 out of bed in his youth.In that pic with Arnold Palmer Clint is 45 years old,Palmer is listed 5ft10 in height,I don't even know if that's accurate,he could have been taller or shorter,but if he was 5ft10 Clint looks about 6ft2 in comparison,allowing for some discrepancies like camera angles ground level posture,Clint definitely does not look more than 6ft3.
@Rory I respect your opinion,but I'd guess 6ft3 max for Clint's peak,he could have measured near 6ft4 out of bed in his youth.In that pic with Arnold Palmer Clint is 45 years old,Palmer is listed 5ft10 in height,I don't even know if that's accurate,he could have been taller or shorter,but if he was 5ft10 Clint looks about 6ft2 in comparison,allowing for some discrepancies like camera angles ground level posture,Clint definitely does not look more than 6ft3.
Rory said on 13/May/21
Stop talking nonsense, Clint wasn't 6ft2 range at all. 6ft3 bare minimum.
Stop talking nonsense, Clint wasn't 6ft2 range at all. 6ft3 bare minimum.
Meltdown said on 12/May/21
I saw a picture of Clint Eastwood and Mel Gibson and he was maybe 2 inches taller. Might want to downgrade to peak 6ft 3 ½, current 5ft 11 ½.
I saw a picture of Clint Eastwood and Mel Gibson and he was maybe 2 inches taller. Might want to downgrade to peak 6ft 3 ½, current 5ft 11 ½.
Hong said on 12/May/21
@ Chris Robinson,I don't think the images were flawed,I think some of his fellow actors and celebs were maybe over listed? Clint wasn't a lift wearer and only wore cowboy boots in westerns.He may have been more 6ft2 to 3 range and had his hight inflated because of his image as the tall hero type.Still 6ft2 or 3 was still pretty tall for guy of his generation,probably around the equivalent of a 6ft4 guy today.
@ Chris Robinson,I don't think the images were flawed,I think some of his fellow actors and celebs were maybe over listed? Clint wasn't a lift wearer and only wore cowboy boots in westerns.He may have been more 6ft2 to 3 range and had his hight inflated because of his image as the tall hero type.Still 6ft2 or 3 was still pretty tall for guy of his generation,probably around the equivalent of a 6ft4 guy today.
Chris Robinson said on 10/May/21
Clint was my first big childhood hero. Pictures with other actors at his peek suggest a height of around 6-3 but he seems to have lost more height with age than anyone else I know. Seeing him on chat shows and interviews I'd be pushed to suggest he's above 6 ft these days. That seems a huge loss and makes me wonder if those original images were flawed.
Clint was my first big childhood hero. Pictures with other actors at his peek suggest a height of around 6-3 but he seems to have lost more height with age than anyone else I know. Seeing him on chat shows and interviews I'd be pushed to suggest he's above 6 ft these days. That seems a huge loss and makes me wonder if those original images were flawed.
Hong said on 10/May/21
Click Here Here's Clint at the same event as the Kobe pic,he's with 5ft7.25 listed Christop Waltz,he's looking around 6ft in comparison.
Click Here Here's Clint at the same event as the Kobe pic,he's with 5ft7.25 listed Christop Waltz,he's looking around 6ft in comparison.
Hong said on 7/May/21
Click Here I still can't believe that there was only 1 inch between these two guys if you compared them both at peak.Clint at 6ft3.7 and Kobe at 6ft4.75,it just seems to unbelievable.Clint was either shorter than his listed height or Kobe is 6ft6 . Here's Clint with 5ft10 listed Arnold Palmer,Clint is in his 40s and would be still at his peak,he looks 6ft2 in comparison.I think he can look 6ft3 usually,but sometimes he kinda doesn't.
Click Here
Click Here I still can't believe that there was only 1 inch between these two guys if you compared them both at peak.Clint at 6ft3.7 and Kobe at 6ft4.75,it just seems to unbelievable.Clint was either shorter than his listed height or Kobe is 6ft6 . Here's Clint with 5ft10 listed Arnold Palmer,Clint is in his 40s and would be still at his peak,he looks 6ft2 in comparison.I think he can look 6ft3 usually,but sometimes he kinda doesn't.
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/May/21
6ft3½ overall is still a safe middle ground for Clint with a fraction either side of that a distinct possibility. He had to have cleared 6ft3 but maybe didn't quite make it to the 6ft4 mark.
I agree with Arch, he was still hovering around 6ft3 in the 80's
6ft3½ overall is still a safe middle ground for Clint with a fraction either side of that a distinct possibility. He had to have cleared 6ft3 but maybe didn't quite make it to the 6ft4 mark.
I agree with Arch, he was still hovering around 6ft3 in the 80's
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/May/21
@Hong
I've said it before but it drives me nuts that 43 yo Eastwood's walk in for his 1973 appearance on Carson has been edited out on YouTube.
Seriously, Carson introduces Clint and then they immediately cut to Eastwood taking his seat. If I wasn't reasonably minded I might guess that there is a conspiracy in play, as if to rob us of a quality comparisons for Clint, particularly with sidekick McMahon. I mean, there are so many other Carson clips in which the guest's full walk on, shaking of hands etc. has been included. Clint's has been "mysteriously" omitted. LOL. Certainly, Clint's later appearance on Carson in 1992 shows Clint shaking hands with McMahon and Clint is a bit shorter.
The full version must be out there and IMO it would provide a comparison just as revealing as Clint's 60s television appearance alongside Buddy Ebsen, Fess Parker and Danny Kaye. My guess is that 43 yo would only break even with McMahon at best, otherwise he would be a touch shorter.
@Hong
I've said it before but it drives me nuts that 43 yo Eastwood's walk in for his 1973 appearance on Carson has been edited out on YouTube.
Seriously, Carson introduces Clint and then they immediately cut to Eastwood taking his seat. If I wasn't reasonably minded I might guess that there is a conspiracy in play, as if to rob us of a quality comparisons for Clint, particularly with sidekick McMahon. I mean, there are so many other Carson clips in which the guest's full walk on, shaking of hands etc. has been included. Clint's has been "mysteriously" omitted. LOL. Certainly, Clint's later appearance on Carson in 1992 shows Clint shaking hands with McMahon and Clint is a bit shorter.
The full version must be out there and IMO it would provide a comparison just as revealing as Clint's 60s television appearance alongside Buddy Ebsen, Fess Parker and Danny Kaye. My guess is that 43 yo would only break even with McMahon at best, otherwise he would be a touch shorter.
Hong said on 14/Apr/21
Agreed Tall In The Saddle,Hudson was more 6ft4.5 not the full 6ft5,Clint looking about 1.5 inches shorter would make him 6ft3.
Agreed Tall In The Saddle,Hudson was more 6ft4.5 not the full 6ft5,Clint looking about 1.5 inches shorter would make him 6ft3.
Tall In The Saddle said on 14/Apr/21
I see about up to 1 1/2" difference between Clint and Rock. If Rock is standing 6'5" in those photos, then I would see Clint as approximately 6'3 1/2". Otherwise, it's about 1/2" less for both guys which I tend to think is perhaps closer to the truth.
I see about up to 1 1/2" difference between Clint and Rock. If Rock is standing 6'5" in those photos, then I would see Clint as approximately 6'3 1/2". Otherwise, it's about 1/2" less for both guys which I tend to think is perhaps closer to the truth.
Rory said on 13/Apr/21
First picture i think Hudson looks 1 inch taller, the second picture id say he looks about 1.5 inches taller. General consensus on Hudson is that he was a 6ft4.5-5 guy.
First picture i think Hudson looks 1 inch taller, the second picture id say he looks about 1.5 inches taller. General consensus on Hudson is that he was a 6ft4.5-5 guy.
Hong said on 13/Apr/21
Some people have Rock as 6ft4 and others 6ft5,there was a 6ft3.5 opinion out there to,even 6ft6,I myself believe he was in the 6ft4 to 6ft5 range,somewhere in the middle.In the second pic with the angle changed Clint looks a bit shorter in comparison.
Some people have Rock as 6ft4 and others 6ft5,there was a 6ft3.5 opinion out there to,even 6ft6,I myself believe he was in the 6ft4 to 6ft5 range,somewhere in the middle.In the second pic with the angle changed Clint looks a bit shorter in comparison.
Rory said on 12/Apr/21
Depends how tall you have Rock Hudson at, i dont personally see much more than an inch difference there but obviously one picture alone tells us little.
Depends how tall you have Rock Hudson at, i dont personally see much more than an inch difference there but obviously one picture alone tells us little.
Hong said on 12/Apr/21
Click Here Clint and Rock Hudson.Hudson clearly taller,Clint looks 6ft3 range in comparison to Hudson,Hudson was IMO looked around 6ft4.5.
Click Here Clint and Rock Hudson.Hudson clearly taller,Clint looks 6ft3 range in comparison to Hudson,Hudson was IMO looked around 6ft4.5.
Tall In The Saddle said on 9/Apr/21
@Hong
Nice find. It must've been written into Newman's contract, all other actors holding distinct height advantage over him being legally required to drop several inches for any photo shoots. Maybe Paul should've gunned for shorter actors like Hoffman, Pacino, etc.
@Hong
Nice find. It must've been written into Newman's contract, all other actors holding distinct height advantage over him being legally required to drop several inches for any photo shoots. Maybe Paul should've gunned for shorter actors like Hoffman, Pacino, etc.
Hong said on 9/Apr/21
Click Here Here Clint looks 6ft2 next to 6ft5.5 listed Ralph Moeller?It's a fairly recent pic by the look of Clint.
Click Here Here Clint looks 6ft2 next to 6ft5.5 listed Ralph Moeller?It's a fairly recent pic by the look of Clint.
Hong said on 8/Apr/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,Here's Newman with 6ft1 range Lee Marvin, and as you can see the same technique is being used in order to make Newman appear similar in height too Marvin,also Newman is wearing a cowboy boots.
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,Here's Newman with 6ft1 range Lee Marvin, and as you can see the same technique is being used in order to make Newman appear similar in height too Marvin,also Newman is wearing a cowboy boots.
Tall In The Saddle said on 8/Apr/21
@Hong
Yeah, so as to not dwarf Newman that whole Eastwood Newman photo shoot had Clint deliberately losing inches in every shot through various declined postures. LOL, I’m surprised they didn’t have Clint do the full splits. Strange to imagine today’s Clint standing alongside peak Newman. Not so much in it.
@Hong
Yeah, so as to not dwarf Newman that whole Eastwood Newman photo shoot had Clint deliberately losing inches in every shot through various declined postures. LOL, I’m surprised they didn’t have Clint do the full splits. Strange to imagine today’s Clint standing alongside peak Newman. Not so much in it.
Tall In The Saddle said on 7/Apr/21
@Hong
I agree exactly with your assessment of the Wayne Eastwood photo. Advantage for Wayne in cowboy boot heel (on set for the movie THE SHOOTIST) and he's also closer to camera. We might assume level ground but we can't confirm. It's only one of two photos that I know of with both Wayne and Clint in the same shot. By virtue of all other comparisons I also agree that, all things equal, Wayne would edge Clint. However, in THE SHOOTIST, I do recall Wayne, even in cowboy boots, struggling to stand on par with Jimmy Stewart in dress shoes. So, determining exactly how tall 69 yo Wayne stood in cowboy boots as at the time of THE SHOOTIST, 1976, would be interesting. Let's remember also that Clint is 46 yo in that photo.
BTW, nice how Clint's shirt blends in so well with the design on the wall behind him.
Whether one has peak Clint at 6'3", 6'4" or somewhere in between, he's still a legitimate poster boy for substantial height loss, his longevity providing a better than average window for observation of same. There are many who have not been as fortunate to have lived as long as Clint has.
@Hong
I agree exactly with your assessment of the Wayne Eastwood photo. Advantage for Wayne in cowboy boot heel (on set for the movie THE SHOOTIST) and he's also closer to camera. We might assume level ground but we can't confirm. It's only one of two photos that I know of with both Wayne and Clint in the same shot. By virtue of all other comparisons I also agree that, all things equal, Wayne would edge Clint. However, in THE SHOOTIST, I do recall Wayne, even in cowboy boots, struggling to stand on par with Jimmy Stewart in dress shoes. So, determining exactly how tall 69 yo Wayne stood in cowboy boots as at the time of THE SHOOTIST, 1976, would be interesting. Let's remember also that Clint is 46 yo in that photo.
BTW, nice how Clint's shirt blends in so well with the design on the wall behind him.
Whether one has peak Clint at 6'3", 6'4" or somewhere in between, he's still a legitimate poster boy for substantial height loss, his longevity providing a better than average window for observation of same. There are many who have not been as fortunate to have lived as long as Clint has.
Hong said on 5/Apr/21
@Pierre,Clint stand with the same posture as Newman,he would gain an inch,he's deliberately dropping height in those Newman pics from that famous photoshoot,I think it's because he was instructed by the photographer not to make Newmam look to short by comparison?but that is just my opinion.I have seen so many pics of Clint now and am of an opinion he was somewhere in the 6ft2.5 to 6ft3.25 range,depending on posture and footwear,too me 6ft2.75 would not be out of the question with 6ft2.5 at an absolute low.As for the Wayne pic, I would bet my house that he is wearing a substantial cowboy boot heel there.Wayne was probably at peak slightly taller than Clint anyway.@Danimal you could be right,but I still think he is losing a couple of inches because of his inability to stand his tallest because of his advanced age, plus a few of actual lost inches is making him appear shorter.
@Pierre,Clint stand with the same posture as Newman,he would gain an inch,he's deliberately dropping height in those Newman pics from that famous photoshoot,I think it's because he was instructed by the photographer not to make Newmam look to short by comparison?but that is just my opinion.I have seen so many pics of Clint now and am of an opinion he was somewhere in the 6ft2.5 to 6ft3.25 range,depending on posture and footwear,too me 6ft2.75 would not be out of the question with 6ft2.5 at an absolute low.As for the Wayne pic, I would bet my house that he is wearing a substantial cowboy boot heel there.Wayne was probably at peak slightly taller than Clint anyway.@Danimal you could be right,but I still think he is losing a couple of inches because of his inability to stand his tallest because of his advanced age, plus a few of actual lost inches is making him appear shorter.
Danimal 5'9 5/8 said on 3/Apr/21
Hong said on 23/Feb/21
At almost 91 and with old man posture he is looking 5ft11 thease days.
Imo, he looks under 5'11" today (refer to my post of him next to 5'11" and change Tank Abbott from 2020). He's easily lost 5" since his prime.
Hong said on 23/Feb/21
At almost 91 and with old man posture he is looking 5ft11 thease days.
Imo, he looks under 5'11" today (refer to my post of him next to 5'11" and change Tank Abbott from 2020). He's easily lost 5" since his prime.
JamesFreakingBond said on 3/Apr/21
Solid 6'3 in his prime, and possibly a flat 6'4. He certainly looked taller at times because he was lanky and lean. Today he looks maybe 6'0 flat, a little over or under that at times.
Solid 6'3 in his prime, and possibly a flat 6'4. He certainly looked taller at times because he was lanky and lean. Today he looks maybe 6'0 flat, a little over or under that at times.
Pierre said on 1/Apr/21
Old pic Clint/Paul Newman listed 5"9.5' Click Here
Paul Newman/Robert Redford listed 5"10.5' peak = Click Here
Old pic Clint/Paul Newman listed 5"9.5' Click Here
Paul Newman/Robert Redford listed 5"10.5' peak = Click Here
Pierre said on 31/Mar/21
Click Here Here next to an old John Wayne .(Maybe John had an advantage of heel...)
Click Here Here next to an old John Wayne .(Maybe John had an advantage of heel...)
Hong said on 13/Mar/21
Click Here The angel is not great but he looks pretty tall in this pic with 6ft Neil Diamond.
Click Here The angel is not great but he looks pretty tall in this pic with 6ft Neil Diamond.
Beau said on 27/Feb/21
Sorry to go off topic, just wanted to put in a comment about Pacino's looks. Pacino during his rise of course was a very different actor to how he was later in his career... understated, not bombastic at all.
His face, and particularly his eyes, were incredibly expressive. In Serpico in particular, which was saddled by somewhat poor acting in several of the supporting staff, he really stood out. And of course as Michael Corleone, he projected an incredible amount of power and fear in an understated way.
10 years ago I was friends w/ guy who was a spitting image of a young Pacino, about the same height at 5'6" too, large expressive eyes, winning personality. His family was wealthy so that led to some of his confidence, but he was a good guy who just had an aura that drew people to him, he stands out to me as a unique character in my life.
Sorry to go off topic, just wanted to put in a comment about Pacino's looks. Pacino during his rise of course was a very different actor to how he was later in his career... understated, not bombastic at all.
His face, and particularly his eyes, were incredibly expressive. In Serpico in particular, which was saddled by somewhat poor acting in several of the supporting staff, he really stood out. And of course as Michael Corleone, he projected an incredible amount of power and fear in an understated way.
10 years ago I was friends w/ guy who was a spitting image of a young Pacino, about the same height at 5'6" too, large expressive eyes, winning personality. His family was wealthy so that led to some of his confidence, but he was a good guy who just had an aura that drew people to him, he stands out to me as a unique character in my life.
Tall In The Saddle said on 26/Feb/21
@Hong
That photo of Clint with Momoa really punctuates the height loss. Even relative to the kids in the photo, Clint’s shrinkage is very noticeable.
Re Rob Reiner. Some believe he might’ve been 6’1” peak. I perused photos from the same event and there are instance in which Clint can look even with Reiner and even a touch shorter. But true, the angles can be very deceiving.
@Hong
That photo of Clint with Momoa really punctuates the height loss. Even relative to the kids in the photo, Clint’s shrinkage is very noticeable.
Re Rob Reiner. Some believe he might’ve been 6’1” peak. I perused photos from the same event and there are instance in which Clint can look even with Reiner and even a touch shorter. But true, the angles can be very deceiving.
Hong said on 24/Feb/21
Click Here Here's 60 year old Clint with 43 year old Rob Reiner who's listed as 6ft2,the angel is in Clint's favour but I still think he would be taller if he was on Reiner's side.He could still look 6ft3 at 60.I don't believe he started losing height until his late 50s ,at 58 he looked maybe an inch short of solid 6ft4 Liam Neeson,or a tad bit more?definitely no less than 6ft2.5 at that age.
Click Here Here's 60 year old Clint with 43 year old Rob Reiner who's listed as 6ft2,the angel is in Clint's favour but I still think he would be taller if he was on Reiner's side.He could still look 6ft3 at 60.I don't believe he started losing height until his late 50s ,at 58 he looked maybe an inch short of solid 6ft4 Liam Neeson,or a tad bit more?definitely no less than 6ft2.5 at that age.
Hong said on 23/Feb/21
Click Here This is a good example how much Clint has shrunk,he was once a similar height to Momoa,at 6ft3 about 1inch shorter? it's really hard to believe,but true.
Click Here This is a good example how much Clint has shrunk,he was once a similar height to Momoa,at 6ft3 about 1inch shorter? it's really hard to believe,but true.
Hong said on 23/Feb/21
At almost 91 and with old man posture he is looking 5ft11 thease days.
At almost 91 and with old man posture he is looking 5ft11 thease days.
Danimal 176.7 said on 23/Feb/21
A broken down Tank Abbott (original UFC fighter) who used to get listed at 6'0" flat back in the 90's but always looked shorter than that is edging out Clint Eastwood here in this in 2020 picture: Click Here
A broken down Tank Abbott (original UFC fighter) who used to get listed at 6'0" flat back in the 90's but always looked shorter than that is edging out Clint Eastwood here in this in 2020 picture: Click Here
Hong said on 22/Feb/21
@Tall In The Saddle,in the scene they share together its on level ground inside a cabin,Clint is stooped a little so he could be dropping a bit of height,but there looks to be more that 2 inches between them.
@Tall In The Saddle,in the scene they share together its on level ground inside a cabin,Clint is stooped a little so he could be dropping a bit of height,but there looks to be more that 2 inches between them.
Tall In The Saddle said on 20/Feb/21
@Hong
I haven’t had the chance to scan through the RH ep with Nielsen. However, I already had Nielsen pegged at 6’ 1/2” so, if there is a 2 1/2” difference, I’m not trying to falsely reduce Nielsen’s height in order to reconcile Clint to 6’3”. Anyway, not surprising that Clint could appear 6’3 1/2” at times. A legit 6’3” is still tall and while we can estimate reasonably, we don’t have the perfect vision or internal judgment ability to deny him an extra 1/2” which he might’ve been in all possibility. I just don’t think it is likely.
@Hong
I haven’t had the chance to scan through the RH ep with Nielsen. However, I already had Nielsen pegged at 6’ 1/2” so, if there is a 2 1/2” difference, I’m not trying to falsely reduce Nielsen’s height in order to reconcile Clint to 6’3”. Anyway, not surprising that Clint could appear 6’3 1/2” at times. A legit 6’3” is still tall and while we can estimate reasonably, we don’t have the perfect vision or internal judgment ability to deny him an extra 1/2” which he might’ve been in all possibility. I just don’t think it is likely.
Hong said on 18/Feb/21
Looking again at the rawhide episode I posted with Leslie Nielsen Clint looks more 6ft3.5 compared to Nielsen's 6ft1 but I've always taught that Nielsen looked more 6ft.5 than 6ft1.
Looking again at the rawhide episode I posted with Leslie Nielsen Clint looks more 6ft3.5 compared to Nielsen's 6ft1 but I've always taught that Nielsen looked more 6ft.5 than 6ft1.
Hong said on 18/Feb/21
Click Here Here's Clint in rawhide again,compared to 6ft1 Leslie Nielsen, and 6ft2 Martin Landou,between 28.30mins and 30mims there is a good comparison especially between Clint and Nielsen,Clint is looking a good 2 inches taller and once again more 6ft3 in comparison.
Click Here Here's Clint in rawhide again,compared to 6ft1 Leslie Nielsen, and 6ft2 Martin Landou,between 28.30mins and 30mims there is a good comparison especially between Clint and Nielsen,Clint is looking a good 2 inches taller and once again more 6ft3 in comparison.
Talk In The Saddle said on 18/Feb/21
@Chaos
No one pulled off the disagreeable donkey look as well as Clint did.
Daffyd Beckham clearly went out of his way to emulate the Clint look. Not a bad effort either. However, then imagine Daffyd blurting “Go ahead, make my day”. Antagonist immediately drops weapon in a fit of laughter. Posh who is there only because she heard there would be cameras, quickly scoops up the gun on Dadffyd’s behalf. Same result achieved as Dirty Harry minus the machismo.
@Chaos
No one pulled off the disagreeable donkey look as well as Clint did.
Daffyd Beckham clearly went out of his way to emulate the Clint look. Not a bad effort either. However, then imagine Daffyd blurting “Go ahead, make my day”. Antagonist immediately drops weapon in a fit of laughter. Posh who is there only because she heard there would be cameras, quickly scoops up the gun on Dadffyd’s behalf. Same result achieved as Dirty Harry minus the machismo.
Tall In The Saddle said on 17/Feb/21
Sure, sourcing an estimate from multiple comparisons is the most ideal but the quality of one comparison to another will vary and sometimes the quality of one can outweigh the quality of numerous examples offered previously. Personally I think the Davis example is of very good quality with Davis’ 6’ 2 1/2” listing reasonably justified. Even allowing Davis up to 6’3”, Clint still stood no taller. There is also the Ebsen comparison which seems to reconcile with the Davis example for a conclusion of 6’3” flat.
Sure, sourcing an estimate from multiple comparisons is the most ideal but the quality of one comparison to another will vary and sometimes the quality of one can outweigh the quality of numerous examples offered previously. Personally I think the Davis example is of very good quality with Davis’ 6’ 2 1/2” listing reasonably justified. Even allowing Davis up to 6’3”, Clint still stood no taller. There is also the Ebsen comparison which seems to reconcile with the Davis example for a conclusion of 6’3” flat.
Chaos Control 6'2.5 said on 17/Feb/21
Is anyone else going to acknowledge how badass his picture looks?
Is anyone else going to acknowledge how badass his picture looks?
Hong said on 17/Feb/21
@Rory if you watch from 33min to 34min there are some good comparisons between the two,I think good enough to conclude that if Davis was his listed height of 6ft2.5 that by comparison Clint looks very similar in height,he does not look a full inch taller for sure.
@Rory if you watch from 33min to 34min there are some good comparisons between the two,I think good enough to conclude that if Davis was his listed height of 6ft2.5 that by comparison Clint looks very similar in height,he does not look a full inch taller for sure.
Rory said on 15/Feb/21
I wouldnt read too much in to his comparison with Davis. Hes just one guy in a sea of other comparisons you can make with other people for Clint. Firstly Davis is listed as being 6ft2.5 but who says he was? He could have been more or even less than that. Also was there really any good comparisons between the two of them in that episode? They appeared on screen together yes, but i wouldn't say there was any clear cut scenes where you could see them side by side, stood stll, to come to a definite conclusion. Rawhide isnt really the best thing to watch for gaging heights imo. Why? Because cowboy boots, cowboy hats and filming often on uneven ground make it hard to accurately guess and compare heights.
I wouldnt read too much in to his comparison with Davis. Hes just one guy in a sea of other comparisons you can make with other people for Clint. Firstly Davis is listed as being 6ft2.5 but who says he was? He could have been more or even less than that. Also was there really any good comparisons between the two of them in that episode? They appeared on screen together yes, but i wouldn't say there was any clear cut scenes where you could see them side by side, stood stll, to come to a definite conclusion. Rawhide isnt really the best thing to watch for gaging heights imo. Why? Because cowboy boots, cowboy hats and filming often on uneven ground make it hard to accurately guess and compare heights.
Hong said on 15/Feb/21
@Tall In The Saddle,Agreed 6ft3 max peak for Clint with the possibility of 6ft2.75.
@Tall In The Saddle,Agreed 6ft3 max peak for Clint with the possibility of 6ft2.75.
James B 172cm said on 15/Feb/21
rob his instagram username is magickal warlock
rob his instagram username is magickal warlock
Tall In The Saddle said on 15/Feb/21
@Hong
Previously I've allowed up to 1/4" over 6'3" for Clint, absolute max. but the true ceiling may well be 6'3" flat. Particularly when examples exist, including those with Davis, suggesting that Clint could've even been a touch under 6'3". RAWHIDE provides for a lot of comparisons. 6'4" Woody Strode appeared an episode but unfortunately comparisons with Clint didn't present. He did however stand alongside Eric Fleming and appeared an easy 1" taller. So, if Clint's height was inflated even at 6'3 1/2", I would say Fleming's height was exaggerated also.
@Hong
Previously I've allowed up to 1/4" over 6'3" for Clint, absolute max. but the true ceiling may well be 6'3" flat. Particularly when examples exist, including those with Davis, suggesting that Clint could've even been a touch under 6'3". RAWHIDE provides for a lot of comparisons. 6'4" Woody Strode appeared an episode but unfortunately comparisons with Clint didn't present. He did however stand alongside Eric Fleming and appeared an easy 1" taller. So, if Clint's height was inflated even at 6'3 1/2", I would say Fleming's height was exaggerated also.
James B 171.5 said on 14/Feb/21
Lol rob I see Glenn still claims to be 5ft8 on Instagram
Editor Rob
Lol rob I see Glenn still claims to be 5ft8 on Instagram
Editor Robnever knew he was still using that, link it up 😄
it's no surprise about his claim...Glenn's dying breath will be "5 foot 8"
it's no surprise about his claim...Glenn's dying breath will be "5 foot 8"
Hong said on 13/Feb/21
The only saving grace for Clint is his posture in general,it's very relaxed and he never stands to his full potential,I think if he was standing for a measurement he could look taller and indeed measure taller than he generally looks on screen and in pics,thats why I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his peak height,and give him 6ft3 peak listing,but with his usual posture he can look in the 6ft2 range.Now he can look 5ft11 range but maybe able to stretch up to 6ft.
The only saving grace for Clint is his posture in general,it's very relaxed and he never stands to his full potential,I think if he was standing for a measurement he could look taller and indeed measure taller than he generally looks on screen and in pics,thats why I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his peak height,and give him 6ft3 peak listing,but with his usual posture he can look in the 6ft2 range.Now he can look 5ft11 range but maybe able to stretch up to 6ft.
Hong said on 12/Feb/21
@Tall In The Saddle I have to agree,I've rarely seen two guys look so similar in height to each other as Davis and Clint,in every scene they shared there is nothing in it,if Davis was 6ft2.5,Clint looks nothing more than that in comparison.
@Tall In The Saddle I have to agree,I've rarely seen two guys look so similar in height to each other as Davis and Clint,in every scene they shared there is nothing in it,if Davis was 6ft2.5,Clint looks nothing more than that in comparison.
Hong said on 12/Feb/21
@Tall In The Saddle,also in that episode with Jim Davis,there is 6ft.5 listed Ralph Bellamy,at the time Bellamy was aged 60 and could have lost bit of height,even if he didn't, Clint still only looked a couple of inches taller.Being objective and forgetting about Clints height listing on this site of 6ft3.5 and of course his official listing of 6ft4,which is looking very unlikely at this stage,I would not rule out a peak height of 189cm or 190cm for Clints peak,but I definitely think he was no more than 6ft3 peak.
@Tall In The Saddle,also in that episode with Jim Davis,there is 6ft.5 listed Ralph Bellamy,at the time Bellamy was aged 60 and could have lost bit of height,even if he didn't, Clint still only looked a couple of inches taller.Being objective and forgetting about Clints height listing on this site of 6ft3.5 and of course his official listing of 6ft4,which is looking very unlikely at this stage,I would not rule out a peak height of 189cm or 190cm for Clints peak,but I definitely think he was no more than 6ft3 peak.
Hong said on 12/Feb/21
Click Here @Rob,What do you think of these pics with Neeson?.They look like there from the mid 90s.Clint looks like he is around 6ft.5 in comparison to 6ft4 Neeson,do youthink its the angles of the pics making Neeson look so much taller.?
Editor Rob
Click Here @Rob,What do you think of these pics with Neeson?.They look like there from the mid 90s.Clint looks like he is around 6ft.5 in comparison to 6ft4 Neeson,do youthink its the angles of the pics making Neeson look so much taller.?
Editor Robhe could make Eastwood seem 6ft then, but I think 1-1.5 inches is at least being taken away with the tilt in Neeson's favour.
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Feb/21
@Hong
Yes, I've seen those comparisons before, particularly Jim Davis, who presents as an excellent yard stick, much like Buddy Ebsen. Unfortunately, uneven ground is inherent with Westerns. I still think the snippet with Dehner is reasonable for estimation, like wise with Dick York. As I said, there are other scenes available to compare them. I just picked a couple. Again, to be fair on Clint, I'm not sure that John Dehner was just a flat 6'2". Perhaps more in the realm of Jim Davis' height. I only base that assumption on the fact that he was clearly taller than 6'2" listed Jack Carson. When I say clearly, I mean by up to 1".
Notably, Jim Davis stood very tall right up to the days of DALLAS. Click Here
Duffy is listed here as 6'2". Elsewhere, he is sometimes listed as 6' 1 1/2". At least early in the DALLAS series, Davis was at least equal to Duffy if not in fact holding a slight edge.
On one hand we could possibly credit the likes of John Dehner and Jim Davis with a bit more height than they were given credit for due to comparisons with the likes of Eastwood. On the other hand however, they may be exceptions to the rule, being guys who were in fact listed exactly at their true heights and who, by comparison to other celebrities, again such as Clint, show up the other celebrities as having obvious inflated listings.
Clint would want to hope that Jim Davis was actually at least 6'3" and not 6'2 1/2" because in at least one of those scenes, on even ground, Davis appears at the very least equal to Clint in height.
Just want to say again, I really appreciate your objectivity, methodology and the evidence you provide in tow. Too often some people are prone to bluntly stating celebrity X is this tall, end of story. Nothing else. LOL. I'm like, show me the money! Haha.
@Hong
Yes, I've seen those comparisons before, particularly Jim Davis, who presents as an excellent yard stick, much like Buddy Ebsen. Unfortunately, uneven ground is inherent with Westerns. I still think the snippet with Dehner is reasonable for estimation, like wise with Dick York. As I said, there are other scenes available to compare them. I just picked a couple. Again, to be fair on Clint, I'm not sure that John Dehner was just a flat 6'2". Perhaps more in the realm of Jim Davis' height. I only base that assumption on the fact that he was clearly taller than 6'2" listed Jack Carson. When I say clearly, I mean by up to 1".
Notably, Jim Davis stood very tall right up to the days of DALLAS. Click Here
Duffy is listed here as 6'2". Elsewhere, he is sometimes listed as 6' 1 1/2". At least early in the DALLAS series, Davis was at least equal to Duffy if not in fact holding a slight edge.
On one hand we could possibly credit the likes of John Dehner and Jim Davis with a bit more height than they were given credit for due to comparisons with the likes of Eastwood. On the other hand however, they may be exceptions to the rule, being guys who were in fact listed exactly at their true heights and who, by comparison to other celebrities, again such as Clint, show up the other celebrities as having obvious inflated listings.
Clint would want to hope that Jim Davis was actually at least 6'3" and not 6'2 1/2" because in at least one of those scenes, on even ground, Davis appears at the very least equal to Clint in height.
Just want to say again, I really appreciate your objectivity, methodology and the evidence you provide in tow. Too often some people are prone to bluntly stating celebrity X is this tall, end of story. Nothing else. LOL. I'm like, show me the money! Haha.
Hong said on 9/Feb/21
Click Here @Tall On The Saddle,I tend to agree there's not much between 6ft2 Dehner and Clint,it's a pity the scene you picked for comparison was on uneven ground also the angle for comparison was not great.The scene with,Dick York was also at a bad angle for comparison,but Clint was clearly the taller.Ive posted another rawhide episode which includes good comparisons with 6ft2.5 Jim Davis,6ft.5 Ralph Bellamy and 6ft1 John Ireland,if you watch from 27mins to 33mins you can see Clint is looking very similar to Davis.
Click Here @Tall On The Saddle,I tend to agree there's not much between 6ft2 Dehner and Clint,it's a pity the scene you picked for comparison was on uneven ground also the angle for comparison was not great.The scene with,Dick York was also at a bad angle for comparison,but Clint was clearly the taller.Ive posted another rawhide episode which includes good comparisons with 6ft2.5 Jim Davis,6ft.5 Ralph Bellamy and 6ft1 John Ireland,if you watch from 27mins to 33mins you can see Clint is looking very similar to Davis.
Tall In The Saddle said on 9/Feb/21
Well known character actor John Dehner appearing in RAWHIDE. Got to 16:20 for a comparison between he and Clint. Click Here
There are other opportunities to compare him with both Clint and Eric Fleming throughout the episode. For mine, Dehner is basically equal in height. Dehner is listed as 188 cm, 6'2". To be fair, I think Dehner might've been a bit taller than that. He also appeared on television opposite reliable 6'2" Jack Carson and appeared to be holding up to 1" advantage on Carson so perhaps Dehner was more like 6'3".
Another cool clip. 6' 1/2" Dick York appearing in a 1963 episode of RAWHIDE along with Barbara "Genie" Eden. Go to about 2:20 to compare Clint with Dick.
Click Here
Clint appears to be standing around 6'3" relative Dick York. If he was any taller, it would only be a touch, like an extra 1/4". If you can't deduce anything from this clip at least you get to see a young Barbara Eden!! :) For mine, Clint ever firming as no more than 6'3 1/4".
Well known character actor John Dehner appearing in RAWHIDE. Got to 16:20 for a comparison between he and Clint. Click Here
There are other opportunities to compare him with both Clint and Eric Fleming throughout the episode. For mine, Dehner is basically equal in height. Dehner is listed as 188 cm, 6'2". To be fair, I think Dehner might've been a bit taller than that. He also appeared on television opposite reliable 6'2" Jack Carson and appeared to be holding up to 1" advantage on Carson so perhaps Dehner was more like 6'3".
Another cool clip. 6' 1/2" Dick York appearing in a 1963 episode of RAWHIDE along with Barbara "Genie" Eden. Go to about 2:20 to compare Clint with Dick.
Click Here
Clint appears to be standing around 6'3" relative Dick York. If he was any taller, it would only be a touch, like an extra 1/4". If you can't deduce anything from this clip at least you get to see a young Barbara Eden!! :) For mine, Clint ever firming as no more than 6'3 1/4".
Hong said on 8/Feb/21
Click Here Here's Clint standing beside Rock Hudson,he looks only a tad Shorter than Rock,Clint is looking 6ft3.5 next to 6ft5 listed Hudson there,even if Rock was 6ft4.5 Clint still looks over 6ft3 in comparison.
Click Here Here's Clint standing beside Rock Hudson,he looks only a tad Shorter than Rock,Clint is looking 6ft3.5 next to 6ft5 listed Hudson there,even if Rock was 6ft4.5 Clint still looks over 6ft3 in comparison.
Tall In The Saddle said on 5/Feb/21
@Hong
Excellent provision of height documentation on Stewart from Ed Rob but I’ll still take Jimmy to be at least 6’3” peak all day long. Unless of course there’s far more unidentified inflation among the comparative heights we rely on. I tend to think not but, as you alluded to, Stewart’s own varied listings suggest a very loose, uneven methods in measurement. Also, as they might’ve simply cut Jimmy some slack to satisfy the minimum height/weight ratio for enlistment. Just as they well they did, his contribution to the war effort was considerable. Talk about a quiet achiever.
@Hong
Excellent provision of height documentation on Stewart from Ed Rob but I’ll still take Jimmy to be at least 6’3” peak all day long. Unless of course there’s far more unidentified inflation among the comparative heights we rely on. I tend to think not but, as you alluded to, Stewart’s own varied listings suggest a very loose, uneven methods in measurement. Also, as they might’ve simply cut Jimmy some slack to satisfy the minimum height/weight ratio for enlistment. Just as they well they did, his contribution to the war effort was considerable. Talk about a quiet achiever.
Hong said on 1/Feb/21
On the James Stewart page there are 5 different examples of Stewart's height 2 at 6ft3,1 at 6ft4,1 at 6ft2 and 1 at,wait for it 6ft1.75?This has left me a bit confused so many different heights for the same person,it would make you doubt any of the heights listed of actors from that generation,and the next which includes Clint,maybe in the future a 6ft2 measurement for Clint from his army physical may surface,and explain his apparent excess shrinkage in later life.
On the James Stewart page there are 5 different examples of Stewart's height 2 at 6ft3,1 at 6ft4,1 at 6ft2 and 1 at,wait for it 6ft1.75?This has left me a bit confused so many different heights for the same person,it would make you doubt any of the heights listed of actors from that generation,and the next which includes Clint,maybe in the future a 6ft2 measurement for Clint from his army physical may surface,and explain his apparent excess shrinkage in later life.
Hong said on 31/Jan/21
Click Here @TALL In The Saddle,Here's Silva only 6 years later, using a walking frame,aged 84,still 9 years after this pic he is still alive.I think if he straightened himself up he would have been close enough to 6ft,in the pic I posted with Clint,who at that stage was, in comparison to 6ft2 Morgan Freeman,looking in the 6ft1 range,sometimes 6ft1.5 depending on posture.
Click Here @TALL In The Saddle,Here's Silva only 6 years later, using a walking frame,aged 84,still 9 years after this pic he is still alive.I think if he straightened himself up he would have been close enough to 6ft,in the pic I posted with Clint,who at that stage was, in comparison to 6ft2 Morgan Freeman,looking in the 6ft1 range,sometimes 6ft1.5 depending on posture.
Tall In The Saddle said on 30/Jan/21
Hong said on 27/Jan/21
Click Here Here's Clint with Henry Silva, it's from 2007, Clint 76 Silva 78,Silva has a peak height listing of 6ft2,it looks like he has shrunk too.
Wow. I know the Clint photo is a few years old but I didn't know Henry Silva was still alive. Older than Clint. A Jack Palance look a like and at one time did a parody of Ripley's Believe or Not hosted by Jack Palance. He might've shrunk somewhat but there is another photo of him embracing Clint and Silva doesn't appear to be dropping as much height.
Too bad the photo with Busey isn't full length. On face value, Silva appears to be dropping a lot to 6' peak Busey, something like 2 + ", putting him at a touch less than 5'10". In all possibility, they may not have been standing on equal ground, otherwise some decent loss if Silva stood a solid 6'2" peak and there is fair evidence to suggest that he did stand that tall at peak.
Hong said on 27/Jan/21
Click Here Here's Clint with Henry Silva, it's from 2007, Clint 76 Silva 78,Silva has a peak height listing of 6ft2,it looks like he has shrunk too.
Wow. I know the Clint photo is a few years old but I didn't know Henry Silva was still alive. Older than Clint. A Jack Palance look a like and at one time did a parody of Ripley's Believe or Not hosted by Jack Palance. He might've shrunk somewhat but there is another photo of him embracing Clint and Silva doesn't appear to be dropping as much height.
Too bad the photo with Busey isn't full length. On face value, Silva appears to be dropping a lot to 6' peak Busey, something like 2 + ", putting him at a touch less than 5'10". In all possibility, they may not have been standing on equal ground, otherwise some decent loss if Silva stood a solid 6'2" peak and there is fair evidence to suggest that he did stand that tall at peak.
Hong said on 27/Jan/21
Click Here Here's Clint with Henry Silva,it's from 2007,Clint 76 Silva 78,Silva has a peak height listing of 6ft2,it looks like he has shrunk too.
Click Here Here's Clint with Henry Silva,it's from 2007,Clint 76 Silva 78,Silva has a peak height listing of 6ft2,it looks like he has shrunk too.
Hong said on 24/Jan/21
Click Here Here's Clint looking a comfortable 6ft3 next to 6ft1.5 James Coburn,both guys are young and at peak,this is a good example of Clint looking his listed height here.
Click Here Here's Clint looking a comfortable 6ft3 next to 6ft1.5 James Coburn,both guys are young and at peak,this is a good example of Clint looking his listed height here.
Hong said on 24/Jan/21
Click Here Clint aged 70,James Cromwell 6ft6,rules out 6ft for Clint aged 70,he looks a comfortable 6ft2 in comparison.The old Clint does look under 6ft next to Hanks I agree but I put that down to posture,but Clint by his mid sixties only 6ft.5 I disagree.Clint still looked in the 6ft2 range at that stage.
Click Here Clint aged 70,James Cromwell 6ft6,rules out 6ft for Clint aged 70,he looks a comfortable 6ft2 in comparison.The old Clint does look under 6ft next to Hanks I agree but I put that down to posture,but Clint by his mid sixties only 6ft.5 I disagree.Clint still looked in the 6ft2 range at that stage.
Hong said on 24/Jan/21
Click Here Here's an example of Clint's posture,good posture?
Editor Rob
Click Here Here's an example of Clint's posture,good posture?
Editor Robfor his age, quite typical curvature.
Hong said on 24/Jan/21
@Pierre everybody else wore cowboy boots in westerns,so Clint didn't have an unfair advantage.Also Clints posture is appalling.
@Pierre everybody else wore cowboy boots in westerns,so Clint didn't have an unfair advantage.Also Clints posture is appalling.
Hong said on 24/Jan/21
Click Here @Pierre,What hight do you think the 63 year old Hackman looks in comparison to Clint? if Clint was 6ft.5,Hackman would be struggling with 5ft11.
Click Here @Pierre,What hight do you think the 63 year old Hackman looks in comparison to Clint? if Clint was 6ft.5,Hackman would be struggling with 5ft11.
Pierre said on 23/Jan/21
Probably nothing above 6"3' peak and even a bit less than this mark,like around 6"2'.Advantageous cow boy boots in lots of movie plus his slim body probably made him bigger than the reality(and 6"2' in 1950 was very tall for a guy)In the years 90s next to Arnold ,Clint in his 65s was looking around same height as him (Arnold absolute max 6"0' Clint around this mark or maybe 6"0.5') then I really doubt in his 65s he lost more than 2 inches from his peak.Now he looks a bit shorter or max same height as 5"11' Tom Hanks.Hard to me to believe a 6"3.5' guy can reduce to around 5"11' ,particularly because his posture still looks good this days.
Probably nothing above 6"3' peak and even a bit less than this mark,like around 6"2'.Advantageous cow boy boots in lots of movie plus his slim body probably made him bigger than the reality(and 6"2' in 1950 was very tall for a guy)In the years 90s next to Arnold ,Clint in his 65s was looking around same height as him (Arnold absolute max 6"0' Clint around this mark or maybe 6"0.5') then I really doubt in his 65s he lost more than 2 inches from his peak.Now he looks a bit shorter or max same height as 5"11' Tom Hanks.Hard to me to believe a 6"3.5' guy can reduce to around 5"11' ,particularly because his posture still looks good this days.
Tall In The Saddle said on 21/Jan/21
@Chaos Control
Yeah, the old 300, I believe they were artificially tanned for the Greek skin tone which also allowed them to utilise different nuances of shading to highlight and exaggerate the muscles, particularly the abs. A stark, high contrast filming effect was also used for additional highlight. The actors were said to be already in readied shape but the director acknowledged the make up and filming advantages.
@Chaos Control
Yeah, the old 300, I believe they were artificially tanned for the Greek skin tone which also allowed them to utilise different nuances of shading to highlight and exaggerate the muscles, particularly the abs. A stark, high contrast filming effect was also used for additional highlight. The actors were said to be already in readied shape but the director acknowledged the make up and filming advantages.
Rory said on 18/Jan/21
It's surprising there's not more height quotes/descriptions about or from Clint. You'd think when Clint was young a guy like him who was well over six foot would have been frequently asked about his height in interviews etc.
I couldn't go to 6ft3 flat for Clint, but I wouldn't rule out 6ft3.25. Then again though, I struggle to see him being shorter than Donald Sutherland. In the last scenes of Kelly's heroes Clint definitely didn't look shorter than Sutherland who certainly wasn't under 6ft3. Some might think 191 for both back then. I'm still happy with 6ft3.5 overall though with a chance of 3.25.
It's surprising there's not more height quotes/descriptions about or from Clint. You'd think when Clint was young a guy like him who was well over six foot would have been frequently asked about his height in interviews etc.
I couldn't go to 6ft3 flat for Clint, but I wouldn't rule out 6ft3.25. Then again though, I struggle to see him being shorter than Donald Sutherland. In the last scenes of Kelly's heroes Clint definitely didn't look shorter than Sutherland who certainly wasn't under 6ft3. Some might think 191 for both back then. I'm still happy with 6ft3.5 overall though with a chance of 3.25.
ChaosControl 6'2 1/2 said on 17/Jan/21
@Tall In The Saddle true they do alter stuff. Didn’t they edit people’s muscles in 300?
@Tall In The Saddle true they do alter stuff. Didn’t they edit people’s muscles in 300?
slim 6'1 said on 17/Jan/21
I’d take the quarter inch for current
I’d take the quarter inch for current
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jan/21
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here The two guys either side of Clint are listed as 6ft2.
I've seen the full scene referenced above with Tim Matheson, Clint and Robert Urich. The GIF in question depicts Clint looking his shortest in that scene, perhaps not standing his best and the angle is somewhat deceiving. Elsewhere in the scene I would give Clint up to 1.5" advantage over Matheson. However, I'm not sure Matheson himself was a full 6'2", possibly more like 6'1.75" based on other comparisons. Also, as per the full scene, Urich appeared that bit shorter than Matheson, putting him at 6'1.5" tops IMO.
I'll stay with 6'3.25" for Clint but he often presents as one of the more tricky height estimates.
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here The two guys either side of Clint are listed as 6ft2.
I've seen the full scene referenced above with Tim Matheson, Clint and Robert Urich. The GIF in question depicts Clint looking his shortest in that scene, perhaps not standing his best and the angle is somewhat deceiving. Elsewhere in the scene I would give Clint up to 1.5" advantage over Matheson. However, I'm not sure Matheson himself was a full 6'2", possibly more like 6'1.75" based on other comparisons. Also, as per the full scene, Urich appeared that bit shorter than Matheson, putting him at 6'1.5" tops IMO.
I'll stay with 6'3.25" for Clint but he often presents as one of the more tricky height estimates.
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jan/21
Well, just IMO, subject to sexual orientation, one might not judge male and female looks in exactly the same way.
Put it this way, as I am predisposed, hetero, good looks in women I know, feel, can often be attracted to and compelled toward in varying degrees. Good looks in men I understand in abstract terms, sans the elements of true attraction and associated appreciation as per orientation.
Al Pacino, Man of the Moment. LOL. Not to pile on but I agree that Pacino was not plain or ordinary. A reasonably unique look, at least to me. As I understand, he possessed sufficient features to be considered good looking. Perhaps lead actors require the majority to perceive them to be good looking but, more importantly, they stand out more when they possess unique features which still add up to good looking.
Even given some of the most beautiful actresses seen on screen, I could walk past at least one woman in a day who was arguably more beautiful and feature perfect than any of them. They're not uncommon and that, in itself, is part of the reason their beauty won't necessarily be a stand out on screen. Ogling stars on the big screen can be an entirely different animal to one's real life tastes. As far as the stars go, there's also plastic surgery, make up, flattering lighting, angles etc. to be getting on with, so they're not necessarily all what they seem to be.
Well, just IMO, subject to sexual orientation, one might not judge male and female looks in exactly the same way.
Put it this way, as I am predisposed, hetero, good looks in women I know, feel, can often be attracted to and compelled toward in varying degrees. Good looks in men I understand in abstract terms, sans the elements of true attraction and associated appreciation as per orientation.
Al Pacino, Man of the Moment. LOL. Not to pile on but I agree that Pacino was not plain or ordinary. A reasonably unique look, at least to me. As I understand, he possessed sufficient features to be considered good looking. Perhaps lead actors require the majority to perceive them to be good looking but, more importantly, they stand out more when they possess unique features which still add up to good looking.
Even given some of the most beautiful actresses seen on screen, I could walk past at least one woman in a day who was arguably more beautiful and feature perfect than any of them. They're not uncommon and that, in itself, is part of the reason their beauty won't necessarily be a stand out on screen. Ogling stars on the big screen can be an entirely different animal to one's real life tastes. As far as the stars go, there's also plastic surgery, make up, flattering lighting, angles etc. to be getting on with, so they're not necessarily all what they seem to be.
Ian C.. said on 14/Jan/21
Well of course, Rory, Pacino is not an ordinary man. He was a movie star, which means that he had personal qualities that caused people to buy tickets to his movies. I just don't think that great good looks had much to do with his appeal. If you look at the faces of most of the classic male movie stars, without having seen them in any movies, you notice right away that they were unusually handsome. And that was a large part of their talent. Think guys like Cary Grant or Gary Cooper or Clark Gable. Those boys had faces, although they also had compelling personalities.
Why did Elvis Presley become a movie star, but Bob Dylan and Roy Orbison and even the Beatles, who were also phenomenally successful as musicians, did not? Well, Elvis was handsome, and you could reasonably argue that fifty percent of his (extraordinary) talent was due to his unusual good looks. (Although Elvis might have been one of the very few people who were successful in show business who had a less-than-average I.Q.)
Clint Eastwood really had movie star good looks, although he never even tried being a romantic lead. In a few of the Dirty Harry movies he kisses a girl, but those scenes have a dropped-in quality, and have nothing to do with his characters or the plots of his movies. His specialty was righteous violence.
Well of course, Rory, Pacino is not an ordinary man. He was a movie star, which means that he had personal qualities that caused people to buy tickets to his movies. I just don't think that great good looks had much to do with his appeal. If you look at the faces of most of the classic male movie stars, without having seen them in any movies, you notice right away that they were unusually handsome. And that was a large part of their talent. Think guys like Cary Grant or Gary Cooper or Clark Gable. Those boys had faces, although they also had compelling personalities.
Why did Elvis Presley become a movie star, but Bob Dylan and Roy Orbison and even the Beatles, who were also phenomenally successful as musicians, did not? Well, Elvis was handsome, and you could reasonably argue that fifty percent of his (extraordinary) talent was due to his unusual good looks. (Although Elvis might have been one of the very few people who were successful in show business who had a less-than-average I.Q.)
Clint Eastwood really had movie star good looks, although he never even tried being a romantic lead. In a few of the Dirty Harry movies he kisses a girl, but those scenes have a dropped-in quality, and have nothing to do with his characters or the plots of his movies. His specialty was righteous violence.
Hong said on 14/Jan/21
@Rory.I saw Magnum Force many times,and I imagined Holbrook to be a solid 6ft1 guy,in comparison to Clint's 6ft4,this was at the time I believed Clint was 6ft4,but was surprised to discover Holbrook was just 6ft,this made me reconsider my opinion of Clint's height.The logical thing for me was to reduce Clint to 6ft3,there is a scene in the movie,Clint and Holbrook are walking side by side in a corridor and they seem even closer in height.But considering Clint's rather relaxed posture in general,I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.To me Clint had the look of a typical 6ft3,an inch shy of 6ft4 and an inch above 6ft2.
@Rory.I saw Magnum Force many times,and I imagined Holbrook to be a solid 6ft1 guy,in comparison to Clint's 6ft4,this was at the time I believed Clint was 6ft4,but was surprised to discover Holbrook was just 6ft,this made me reconsider my opinion of Clint's height.The logical thing for me was to reduce Clint to 6ft3,there is a scene in the movie,Clint and Holbrook are walking side by side in a corridor and they seem even closer in height.But considering Clint's rather relaxed posture in general,I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.To me Clint had the look of a typical 6ft3,an inch shy of 6ft4 and an inch above 6ft2.
Rory said on 14/Jan/21
@Ian C. No idea how you've come to the conclusion that Pacino looks ordinary. Very distinctive looking imo Pale skin, black hair and large black eyes. It's partly his face, and the character in his face which made him the great actor he is. I'd say Steve Mcqueen or Ryan O'neal are maybe two male leads who look fairly ordinary, whereas I can't recall seeing many people who look like Pacino does.
@Hong,I think you'd have to watch Magnum force really. In the film Clint could look 3 inches taller than Holbrook at times but his posture in it was pretty relaxed. Also in that scene with the pictures of the two alleged 6ft2 guys, those guys are in 1-1.5 inch range boots and Clint was in fairly thin looking sneakers and yet still looked 1+ inches taller. Clint also had roughly 3 inches on David Soul in that film. I'd say maybe 6ft3.25 in Magnum force, didn't really look under 6ft3 if you watch it.
@Ian C. No idea how you've come to the conclusion that Pacino looks ordinary. Very distinctive looking imo Pale skin, black hair and large black eyes. It's partly his face, and the character in his face which made him the great actor he is. I'd say Steve Mcqueen or Ryan O'neal are maybe two male leads who look fairly ordinary, whereas I can't recall seeing many people who look like Pacino does.
@Hong,I think you'd have to watch Magnum force really. In the film Clint could look 3 inches taller than Holbrook at times but his posture in it was pretty relaxed. Also in that scene with the pictures of the two alleged 6ft2 guys, those guys are in 1-1.5 inch range boots and Clint was in fairly thin looking sneakers and yet still looked 1+ inches taller. Clint also had roughly 3 inches on David Soul in that film. I'd say maybe 6ft3.25 in Magnum force, didn't really look under 6ft3 if you watch it.
Ian C. said on 13/Jan/21
Maybe "plain" is the wrong word for Pacino. I mean, he looks ordinary. There is nothing about his face or figure that would make you notice him he weren't a movie star. He's not Paul Newman or Clint Eastwood, for example. There are in fact quite a few movie stars who have played leading roles in movies who are physically ordinary. Dustin Hoffman, Donald and Kiefer Sutherland come to mind. Kevin Costner and Jim Carrey are kind of borderline ordinary-looking. Fred Astaire is the perfect example of an ordinary-looking man who was usually paired romantically with women far outside his range in the looks department.
Maybe "plain" is the wrong word for Pacino. I mean, he looks ordinary. There is nothing about his face or figure that would make you notice him he weren't a movie star. He's not Paul Newman or Clint Eastwood, for example. There are in fact quite a few movie stars who have played leading roles in movies who are physically ordinary. Dustin Hoffman, Donald and Kiefer Sutherland come to mind. Kevin Costner and Jim Carrey are kind of borderline ordinary-looking. Fred Astaire is the perfect example of an ordinary-looking man who was usually paired romantically with women far outside his range in the looks department.
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here Here's Holbrook with 5ft11.5 listed Alac Baldwin,Holbrook was 61 years old and my be a bit under peak height?I don't disagree with Holbrook at 6ft but Clint was definitely not 3.5 inches taller than him.
Click Here Here's Holbrook with 5ft11.5 listed Alac Baldwin,Holbrook was 61 years old and my be a bit under peak height?I don't disagree with Holbrook at 6ft but Clint was definitely not 3.5 inches taller than him.
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here Rob you have Hal Holbrook listed as 6ft peak,if that was the case Clint looked in some scenes with him like 6ft2 max,in the pic I posted he looks no more than 6ft3 in comparison to Holbrook.
Click Here Rob you have Hal Holbrook listed as 6ft peak,if that was the case Clint looked in some scenes with him like 6ft2 max,in the pic I posted he looks no more than 6ft3 in comparison to Holbrook.
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here The two guys either side of Clint are listed as 6ft2.
Editor Rob
Click Here The two guys either side of Clint are listed as 6ft2.
Editor Robhe could seem at most 6ft 3 with holbrook back then, though with those 2 looks a good 6ft 3.
Hong said on 13/Jan/21
Click Here "Hi Rob",here's some scenes of Clint and Carol Channing together in the movie,it's from 1956,although Channing is a tall woman at5ft8.5 and with a reasonable heel should could be as as tall as 5ft11,Clint still looks max 6 ft3 in comparison, maybe even a bit less?
Editor Rob
Click Here "Hi Rob",here's some scenes of Clint and Carol Channing together in the movie,it's from 1956,although Channing is a tall woman at5ft8.5 and with a reasonable heel should could be as as tall as 5ft11,Clint still looks max 6 ft3 in comparison, maybe even a bit less?
Editor RobI'd have said about 6ft 3 range, but sometimes in film height differences can look less than what you'd see in person.
Hong said on 12/Jan/21
Click Here Thanks Rob,I've posted a pic of the footwear Carol wore on the movie,It could have been the same as in the pic of Carol and Clint I posted.If it was how tall do you think Clint looks in comparison?
Editor Rob
Click Here Thanks Rob,I've posted a pic of the footwear Carol wore on the movie,It could have been the same as in the pic of Carol and Clint I posted.If it was how tall do you think Clint looks in comparison?
Editor Robit's not really over 2 inch range
Rory said on 12/Jan/21
Young Al pacino was clearly a good looking guy, not plain. At least as good looking if not better looking than any others in your list.
Young Al pacino was clearly a good looking guy, not plain. At least as good looking if not better looking than any others in your list.
James B 172cm said on 12/Jan/21
Actually Al Pacino when he was younger was considered very good looking (no homo(
Actually Al Pacino when he was younger was considered very good looking (no homo(
Ian C. said on 10/Jan/21
When I gauge anyone's looks it's just a binary choice: Either people are good looking or they're not. Male good looks come in many varieties. John Goodman is a good-looking guy, even though he's obese. Al Pacino is a plain man. It doesn't have much to do with isolated details.
Who are the all time champions of male beauty (which is distinct from good looks)? Here's my short list: Sean Connery, Yul Brynner, Craig Stevens (who played TV's Peter Gunn) and Robert Conrad. Two on the list are tall and two are short, but all are strikingly beautiful, such that it's the first thing you notice about them. Some beautiful men, like Roger Moore and Errol Flynn, seem smug in their beauty, and I just don't like them.
My favourite movie stars are people with compelling faces. Here is that list: Boris Karloff, Jack Palance, Charles Bronson and Lee Marvin. Interestingly, all those men had good careers playing villains.
When I gauge anyone's looks it's just a binary choice: Either people are good looking or they're not. Male good looks come in many varieties. John Goodman is a good-looking guy, even though he's obese. Al Pacino is a plain man. It doesn't have much to do with isolated details.
Who are the all time champions of male beauty (which is distinct from good looks)? Here's my short list: Sean Connery, Yul Brynner, Craig Stevens (who played TV's Peter Gunn) and Robert Conrad. Two on the list are tall and two are short, but all are strikingly beautiful, such that it's the first thing you notice about them. Some beautiful men, like Roger Moore and Errol Flynn, seem smug in their beauty, and I just don't like them.
My favourite movie stars are people with compelling faces. Here is that list: Boris Karloff, Jack Palance, Charles Bronson and Lee Marvin. Interestingly, all those men had good careers playing villains.
Rising174cm said on 10/Jan/21
slim 6'1 said on 8/Jan/21
191 peak is good, probably 182 current 👍
@Slim: You could be spot on regarding both peak and current. In addition to the 1988 article describing Clint as 6'3" above, he was listed at 6'3" in this 1993 NY Times article: Click Here Note that the article lists Charlie Sheen and Sly Stallone at 5'10" and 5'10.5", respectively, which both claimed to the NY Times. They also have Arnold at his claimed height of 6'2". This suggests to me that Clint may have claimed 6'3" around the late 80s/early 90s or his listing may have been revised down to 6'3" in the late 80s/early 90s.
slim 6'1 said on 8/Jan/21
191 peak is good, probably 182 current 👍
@Slim: You could be spot on regarding both peak and current. In addition to the 1988 article describing Clint as 6'3" above, he was listed at 6'3" in this 1993 NY Times article: Click Here Note that the article lists Charlie Sheen and Sly Stallone at 5'10" and 5'10.5", respectively, which both claimed to the NY Times. They also have Arnold at his claimed height of 6'2". This suggests to me that Clint may have claimed 6'3" around the late 80s/early 90s or his listing may have been revised down to 6'3" in the late 80s/early 90s.
James B 172cm said on 10/Jan/21
rory my legs are short and stubby but there muscular at the same time.
rory my legs are short and stubby but there muscular at the same time.
ChaosControl 6'2.5 said on 10/Jan/21
@Ian this is why rugby is better than football. Any body type, height and build is useful in rugby!
@Ian this is why rugby is better than football. Any body type, height and build is useful in rugby!
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Jan/21
@Chaos
Nah, you typed it out fine. Just me, just clarifying myself.
@Chaos
Nah, you typed it out fine. Just me, just clarifying myself.
Hong said on 9/Jan/21
Click Here Rob,this is a young peak height Clint next to,5ft8.5 listed, "by you" Carol Channing,how tall do you think Clint looks in comparison,taking into account footwear and Carol's posture,do you think Clint looks 6ft3.5 in comparison?If not how tall do you think Clint looks?Also I think you should seriously consider a slight downgrade to 6ft3.25 at least for Clint's peak,6ft3 flat would IMO be more accurate.
Editor Rob
Click Here Rob,this is a young peak height Clint next to,5ft8.5 listed, "by you" Carol Channing,how tall do you think Clint looks in comparison,taking into account footwear and Carol's posture,do you think Clint looks 6ft3.5 in comparison?If not how tall do you think Clint looks?Also I think you should seriously consider a slight downgrade to 6ft3.25 at least for Clint's peak,6ft3 flat would IMO be more accurate.
Editor RobIt's one of those unknown's with her footwear.
Ian C. said on 9/Jan/21
I'm a true believer in the validity of genetic endowments in ectomorphy, mesomorphy and ectomorphy because I'm an extreme ectomorph. Ecotmorphs have very little capacity to change their overall body shapes. We can't grow fat by stuffing ourselves, and we can't grow muscle by lifting weights.
When I was 20 I was six foot four and 165 pounds. Now, at nearly seventy, I'm still six foot four, and maybe 180 pounds. A weight gain of 15 pounds on a man my height is barely noticeable. I'm still the skinny guy, except with a small paunch.
Everybody who plays professional football, with the possible exceptions of the kickers, is a polar mesomorph. You have to be born with that kind of talent. You can't develop it, no matter how hard you train. Clint Eastwood, who is superior in strength to the average man, could never have played professional football. He's just too small. Even Charlton Heston, who was enormously strong, would have been too small to play football beyond the college level.
Natural born endomorphs actually have a biologic advantage. They have superior digestive systems and capacities for storing excess calories. The Pima Indians in the United States, who are a desert people, are now plagued with obesity and the diseases that attend it. Unfortunately, modern societies that produce ample food have condemned the modern Pima, with their desert-ready digestive systems, to population-wide obesity. Once again, this is genetic. It isn't cultural, except in the sense that the Pima can now buy food in supermarkets.
I'm a true believer in the validity of genetic endowments in ectomorphy, mesomorphy and ectomorphy because I'm an extreme ectomorph. Ecotmorphs have very little capacity to change their overall body shapes. We can't grow fat by stuffing ourselves, and we can't grow muscle by lifting weights.
When I was 20 I was six foot four and 165 pounds. Now, at nearly seventy, I'm still six foot four, and maybe 180 pounds. A weight gain of 15 pounds on a man my height is barely noticeable. I'm still the skinny guy, except with a small paunch.
Everybody who plays professional football, with the possible exceptions of the kickers, is a polar mesomorph. You have to be born with that kind of talent. You can't develop it, no matter how hard you train. Clint Eastwood, who is superior in strength to the average man, could never have played professional football. He's just too small. Even Charlton Heston, who was enormously strong, would have been too small to play football beyond the college level.
Natural born endomorphs actually have a biologic advantage. They have superior digestive systems and capacities for storing excess calories. The Pima Indians in the United States, who are a desert people, are now plagued with obesity and the diseases that attend it. Unfortunately, modern societies that produce ample food have condemned the modern Pima, with their desert-ready digestive systems, to population-wide obesity. Once again, this is genetic. It isn't cultural, except in the sense that the Pima can now buy food in supermarkets.
ChaosControl 6'2.5 said on 9/Jan/21
@Tall In The Saddle my comment about the volleyball was a joke, admittedly not as funny typed out as it was in my head. I will tell the truth and say I usually judge overweight people for their habits. I don’t really believe in comfort foods, I prefer to exercise to blow off steam and honestly I think intuitive eating should be treated as an addiction (If I shot heroin every time I was upset they’d put me away)
@Tall In The Saddle my comment about the volleyball was a joke, admittedly not as funny typed out as it was in my head. I will tell the truth and say I usually judge overweight people for their habits. I don’t really believe in comfort foods, I prefer to exercise to blow off steam and honestly I think intuitive eating should be treated as an addiction (If I shot heroin every time I was upset they’d put me away)
Rory said on 9/Jan/21
I think average to long legs for your height is perfect for a man. Very long looks disproportionate and a bit effeminate, short looks look a bit stubby. 35 inseam is probably perfect for a 6ft3-4 guy.
I think average to long legs for your height is perfect for a man. Very long looks disproportionate and a bit effeminate, short looks look a bit stubby. 35 inseam is probably perfect for a 6ft3-4 guy.
James B 172cm said on 9/Jan/21
ian C- speaking of physiques do you think long legs on men are considered more attractive?
I know Clint eastwood has very long legs
ian C- speaking of physiques do you think long legs on men are considered more attractive?
I know Clint eastwood has very long legs
ChaosControl 6'2.5 said on 9/Jan/21
@Ian if you’re so sceptical of BMI, surely you’d realise that the endo/ecto/mesomorph isn’t real either, and it’s just nonsensical bro-science used to gatekeep physique. Body shape and fat mass are much easier to control than you’re making out. Difficult yes, but not THAT hard. I eat well below my recommended daily calories (an active 6’2.5 208lb guy should be eating 2500+ according to calculator.net and I get 2000-2200) yet I’m technically overweight for my height. In terms of physical capacity I’m certainly strong, and I look mesomorphic, yet my 50” chest measurement would imply I’m an endomorph, even though I’m 11%bf and didn’t struggle too much losing weight.
@Ian if you’re so sceptical of BMI, surely you’d realise that the endo/ecto/mesomorph isn’t real either, and it’s just nonsensical bro-science used to gatekeep physique. Body shape and fat mass are much easier to control than you’re making out. Difficult yes, but not THAT hard. I eat well below my recommended daily calories (an active 6’2.5 208lb guy should be eating 2500+ according to calculator.net and I get 2000-2200) yet I’m technically overweight for my height. In terms of physical capacity I’m certainly strong, and I look mesomorphic, yet my 50” chest measurement would imply I’m an endomorph, even though I’m 11%bf and didn’t struggle too much losing weight.
Ian C. said on 9/Jan/21
Congratulations on your weight loss Chaos. I do think, though, that most of us must accept natural, genetically defined limits on how are bodies can look or perform. Most fat people eventually give up trying to make themselves thinner and accept that they look as they do, and I believe it unfair that they are insulted and scorned for something that is mostly beyond their control.
I'm an ectomorph, tall and thin, and when I was in my teens I fell for the bogus claim that bodybuilding could turn me into a mesomorph. This just wasn't so. I lifted weights, ate at least 4000 calories a day, and succeeded only in making myself tired all the time. By the time I turned twenty, I had just said, forget it, this is my body. Of course, it's a lot easier to accept your body if you're thin than if you're fat, and I would never compare my own struggles with body transformation to your own.
And of course, many people are just physically gifted. Eastwood was in that category and, even if he hadn't pursued bodybuilding, would still have had an impressive physique. In fact, most people who are successful in the movies are physically gifted, because audiences want to watch strong, beautiful people. How many people do you see in movies, even in supporting roles who are fat, or even were glasses?
Congratulations on your weight loss Chaos. I do think, though, that most of us must accept natural, genetically defined limits on how are bodies can look or perform. Most fat people eventually give up trying to make themselves thinner and accept that they look as they do, and I believe it unfair that they are insulted and scorned for something that is mostly beyond their control.
I'm an ectomorph, tall and thin, and when I was in my teens I fell for the bogus claim that bodybuilding could turn me into a mesomorph. This just wasn't so. I lifted weights, ate at least 4000 calories a day, and succeeded only in making myself tired all the time. By the time I turned twenty, I had just said, forget it, this is my body. Of course, it's a lot easier to accept your body if you're thin than if you're fat, and I would never compare my own struggles with body transformation to your own.
And of course, many people are just physically gifted. Eastwood was in that category and, even if he hadn't pursued bodybuilding, would still have had an impressive physique. In fact, most people who are successful in the movies are physically gifted, because audiences want to watch strong, beautiful people. How many people do you see in movies, even in supporting roles who are fat, or even were glasses?
ChaosControl 6'2.5 said on 8/Jan/21
@Tall In The Saddle yeah... you’ll watch it to call them out on it... riiiight...
@Tall In The Saddle yeah... you’ll watch it to call them out on it... riiiight...
slim 6'1 said on 8/Jan/21
191 peak is good, probably 182 current 👍
191 peak is good, probably 182 current 👍
Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.
Other vital statistics like weight or shoe size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.
Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.