Tom Felton's Height
5ft 8 ½ (174 cm)
English actor, best known for playing Draco Malfoy in the Harry Potter series of films, as well as for appearing in Rise of the Apes. In a 2005 fact-file he gave 5ft 9 as his height. In this photo Tom had about 1/4 inch less sneaker than me.
5ft 8 Jenny, Tom, 5ft 8 Rob @ Collectormania (6th Jun 2009)
You May Be Interested
Evanna Lynch
5ft 2 ¼ (158 cm)
5ft 2 ¼ (158 cm)
Devon Murray
5ft 1 ¾ (157 cm)
5ft 1 ¾ (157 cm)
Jamie Waylett
6ft ¾ in (185 cm)
6ft ¾ in (185 cm)
Matthew Lewis
5ft 11 ½ (182 cm)
5ft 11 ½ (182 cm)
Add a Comment282 comments
Average Guess (122 Votes)
5ft 8.59in (174.2cm)
5ft 8.59in (174.2cm)
shoelifts said on 23/Mar/23
5ft8 1/2
5ft8 1/2
Charly95 said on 5/Mar/23
172 He looks shorter than you
172 He looks shorter than you
JOSHUA8128418 said on 28/Sep/22
5'8.75" seems to be accurate
5'8.75" seems to be accurate
David Tang said on 28/May/22
5'8 1/2. rob i think you nailed this one. I perfectly agree.
5'8 1/2. rob i think you nailed this one. I perfectly agree.
Darksol64 said on 29/Apr/22
I forget which movie but I recall a scene where he looks huge next to Dan. His eyeline was around the top of his head and towered him heavily. You'd of thought he was a full 6 ft there. (unless you know how short Dan is to begin with)
Which goes to show you how relative height can really be based on who's standing next to you. 6'2 looks towering until you stick a 6'10 guy next to him, making him look sub-6 ft easily, almost like an illusion.
I forget which movie but I recall a scene where he looks huge next to Dan. His eyeline was around the top of his head and towered him heavily. You'd of thought he was a full 6 ft there. (unless you know how short Dan is to begin with)
Which goes to show you how relative height can really be based on who's standing next to you. 6'2 looks towering until you stick a 6'10 guy next to him, making him look sub-6 ft easily, almost like an illusion.
Original said on 22/Feb/22
5'8.75 seems more correct if he has 0'5 less height in his shoes, perhaps even 5'9.
Editor Rob
5'8.75 seems more correct if he has 0'5 less height in his shoes, perhaps even 5'9.
Editor Rob1/4 inch footwear difference
Seal said on 16/Oct/21
Given he has less sneaker I'd give him 5'8.75. Rob can you add he also played Julian Albert in the flash?
Given he has less sneaker I'd give him 5'8.75. Rob can you add he also played Julian Albert in the flash?
toddd0461 said on 14/Oct/21
I'd give him 5'8.75.
I'd give him 5'8.75.
Miss Sandy Cowell said on 22/Sep/21
🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️ Happy Birthday Tom! 🧙♂️🎈🎁🎂
Here's wishing Tom Felton a fabulous 34th Birthday today. Let's hope he receives all the gifts on his wish list and enjoys a healthy and happy New Year ahead. From me, he gets a nice, plump ginger Tomcat!
🎀🐈🎀
5ft8.75. 😄👍🍰🍻😁 XXX
🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️🎂🎁🎈🐈🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️🎂🎁🎈🐈
🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️ Happy Birthday Tom! 🧙♂️🎈🎁🎂
Here's wishing Tom Felton a fabulous 34th Birthday today. Let's hope he receives all the gifts on his wish list and enjoys a healthy and happy New Year ahead. From me, he gets a nice, plump ginger Tomcat!
🎀🐈🎀
5ft8.75. 😄👍🍰🍻😁 XXX
🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️🎂🎁🎈🐈🎂🎁🎈🧙♂️🎂🎁🎈🐈
Morgan Kaye said on 20/Sep/21
5'8.5 or a weak 5'9.
5'8.5 or a weak 5'9.
Elene said on 7/Aug/21
5’8
5’8
Nicster1298 said on 15/Mar/21
Rob is actually more like 5'8.5 himself I think so this adds up
Rob is actually more like 5'8.5 himself I think so this adds up
RJT said on 22/Jan/21
I've noticed that the main cast for male actors in Harry Potter are all below average height.
Kinda unusual cause they're millenial generation.
I've noticed that the main cast for male actors in Harry Potter are all below average height.
Kinda unusual cause they're millenial generation.
Slim 6'1" said on 15/Jan/21
Could be near 5’9”
Could be near 5’9”
Mimi said on 7/Oct/20
He's right around the average for UK men. Meanwhile, Dan Radcliffe is around the average for Southeast Asian men.
He's right around the average for UK men. Meanwhile, Dan Radcliffe is around the average for Southeast Asian men.
Slim 6'1" said on 7/Aug/20
174, gosling had him by roughly 10cm
174, gosling had him by roughly 10cm
Jkiller said on 12/Jul/20
Looked 5'8.5 in Harry Potter
Looked 5'8.5 in Harry Potter
JohnMoore-162cm said on 25/Apr/20
No less than 5'8.5"
No less than 5'8.5"
Nearly 180cm guy said on 6/Apr/20
I think 174 cm is ok for Felton. But in 2009 Felton met Jonathan Ross and Pixie Lott, Ross looked about 5 inches taller than him: Click Here Click Here
I sent a comment about Ross a few days ago. Ross met Felton at the same event he met Pamela Anderson. Here are Pamela and Pixie heels and Tom and Ross shoes: Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here
Rob, you met Tom in 2009, he was 22 years old by then, and he probably reached his full height by then, and Ross was 49 at the time, and he may not have lost anything noticeable, though today he seems to have shrunk. Is there still a chance that you will give Ross 186 cm?
Editor Rob
I think 174 cm is ok for Felton. But in 2009 Felton met Jonathan Ross and Pixie Lott, Ross looked about 5 inches taller than him: Click Here Click Here
I sent a comment about Ross a few days ago. Ross met Felton at the same event he met Pamela Anderson. Here are Pamela and Pixie heels and Tom and Ross shoes: Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here
Rob, you met Tom in 2009, he was 22 years old by then, and he probably reached his full height by then, and Ross was 49 at the time, and he may not have lost anything noticeable, though today he seems to have shrunk. Is there still a chance that you will give Ross 186 cm?
Editor RobFor a peak, I don't dismiss the idea of 186, he might have lost a cm of height by his mid to late 50's.
TheBat said on 1/Mar/20
Solid 5'8.5" for Tom sounds right.
Solid 5'8.5" for Tom sounds right.
Nik said on 1/Aug/19
He looks it! Average guess = 5 foot 8 5/8!
He looks it! Average guess = 5 foot 8 5/8!
khaled taban said on 24/Jun/19
He is 5'8.5", 5'9" is unlikely.
He is 5'8.5", 5'9" is unlikely.
Bobby 5'10 (178cm) said on 25/Feb/19
He was also on The Flash as Alchemy for like a season or so.
He was also on The Flash as Alchemy for like a season or so.
James G. said on 2/Jan/19
5’8.75,” or very minimally under 5’9.”
5’8.75,” or very minimally under 5’9.”
Nik said on 21/Dec/18
No less than 5'8.5"! The average guess doesn't surprise me one jot!
No less than 5'8.5"! The average guess doesn't surprise me one jot!
Sandy Cowell said on 21/Dec/18
Tom looks much the same sort of height as you and Jenny, Rob! I can settle for 5ft8.5 for him, and I'm happy to say that yes, I DO recognise him from his part in the charming 'Harry Potter'* movies, when he was, of course, much smaller!
*My boyfriend has the set of them! 😉🎄
Tom looks much the same sort of height as you and Jenny, Rob! I can settle for 5ft8.5 for him, and I'm happy to say that yes, I DO recognise him from his part in the charming 'Harry Potter'* movies, when he was, of course, much smaller!
*My boyfriend has the set of them! 😉🎄
MrFish said on 17/Dec/18
Rob, would I almost certainly edge Tom a fraction?
Editor Rob
Rob, would I almost certainly edge Tom a fraction?
Editor RobI cannot see Tom almost 5ft 9 in person, so I think if you stood side by side there would be a small difference.
Christian 6'5 3/8" said on 23/Oct/18
No less than 5'8.25"
No less than 5'8.25"
MrFish said on 8/Aug/18
Rob, what would you guess for Tom's out-of-bed height?
Editor Rob
Rob, what would you guess for Tom's out-of-bed height?
Editor RobHe likely would clear 5ft 9 a fraction.
Nik said on 3/Jun/18
I am happy that Tom is at least his listed height!
I am happy that Tom is at least his listed height!
Vam said on 2/Dec/17
Slim 174...173.5...big difference...
Slim 174...173.5...big difference...
Sacred said on 6/Nov/17
175 cm for him in HP
175 cm for him in HP
Slim said on 28/Sep/17
Gosling had 4 inches on this guy, making Gosling 184(6'0.5") or tom Felton 173.5(5'8.25")
Gosling had 4 inches on this guy, making Gosling 184(6'0.5") or tom Felton 173.5(5'8.25")
Slim said on 19/Sep/17
5'8.25" max
5'8.25" max
MrFish said on 23/Jul/17
Rob, do you think that I, with a low of 174.3-174.6, would be a hair taller than Tom?
Editor Rob
Rob, do you think that I, with a low of 174.3-174.6, would be a hair taller than Tom?
Editor Rob well I think in a photo it would be hard to spot any difference really.
Theo said on 18/Jun/17
@Chris Not really. A guy like Daniel looked as tiny as he is when next to anyone of average height.
@Chris Not really. A guy like Daniel looked as tiny as he is when next to anyone of average height.
Chris said on 5/Jun/17
It's funny, because in the HP movies Dan looked 5'8 and Tom looked 6ft range - but add reality in there and Dan's 5'4.5 and Tom's 5'8.5. Camera angles, eh?
It's funny, because in the HP movies Dan looked 5'8 and Tom looked 6ft range - but add reality in there and Dan's 5'4.5 and Tom's 5'8.5. Camera angles, eh?
Bobby said on 23/Mar/17
I think most are forgetting that Tom is essentially the same height as Rob, only thing is, the camera angles are faovring Rob and he appears taller than Felton, when the reality is different. I personally don't see issue with Felton claiming 5'9, if 5'8.5 is his height in the evening, and at worst, he might lose some 2-3mm if it's his afternoon height.
I think most are forgetting that Tom is essentially the same height as Rob, only thing is, the camera angles are faovring Rob and he appears taller than Felton, when the reality is different. I personally don't see issue with Felton claiming 5'9, if 5'8.5 is his height in the evening, and at worst, he might lose some 2-3mm if it's his afternoon height.
Sully said on 2/Dec/16
Hi Rob , if i measure 174.5-175 cm at night how would i compare to you and Tom Felton ?
Editor Rob
Hi Rob , if i measure 174.5-175 cm at night how would i compare to you and Tom Felton ?
Editor Rob Sully, you would likely edge him out, but in a photo it might not look like any noticeable difference.
S.J.H said on 14/Nov/16
Ok rob since he given 5'9 as his height he might be sub 5'8 with shoes at 5'9 but it's just strange that Mamun described that he is half inch shorter than him in person and have mention he wear a flat footwear with felton
Editor Rob
Ok rob since he given 5'9 as his height he might be sub 5'8 with shoes at 5'9 but it's just strange that Mamun described that he is half inch shorter than him in person and have mention he wear a flat footwear with felton
Editor Rob well I did check out this photo and with same footwear they look identical.
I don't know if they have identical posture though!
I don't know if they have identical posture though!
S.J.H said on 11/Nov/16
5'8 Mamun met him in comic con and i saw the picture felton look half inch under him. 5'7.5 or 172cm def not 5'8 or 5'8.5
Editor Rob
5'8 Mamun met him in comic con and i saw the picture felton look half inch under him. 5'7.5 or 172cm def not 5'8 or 5'8.5
Editor Rob SJ, for me there's a minuscule percentage chance Felton is sub 5ft 8.
I stood there with the guy talking for a bit and saw how he looked with Jenny side by side...and also I took This photo of a friend with Felton too.
That friend is a bit taller than 5ft 6.5 Big G in person...
I stood there with the guy talking for a bit and saw how he looked with Jenny side by side...and also I took This photo of a friend with Felton too.
That friend is a bit taller than 5ft 6.5 Big G in person...
TJE said on 4/Oct/16
At least 5'8.25
At least 5'8.25
Alex 164cm 5'4 feet said on 26/Jul/16
Rob, please answer this for me. If Grant Gustin is 5'11.5 and Grant's like more than 3 inches taller than Tom Felton. It was in a game with the cast of the Flash. Can you check it out and see if shoe and stuff like that made a difference?
Rob, please answer this for me. If Grant Gustin is 5'11.5 and Grant's like more than 3 inches taller than Tom Felton. It was in a game with the cast of the Flash. Can you check it out and see if shoe and stuff like that made a difference?
Johno said on 21/Jul/16
To me, he does not seem edge Rob nor Jenny, as it is; Rob seems to have 0.5-0.75 inches on and then we takeaway 0.25-inches for Rob's footwear advantage, i do believe Rob would have the edge on him.
5'8.25 seems fine to me.
To me, he does not seem edge Rob nor Jenny, as it is; Rob seems to have 0.5-0.75 inches on and then we takeaway 0.25-inches for Rob's footwear advantage, i do believe Rob would have the edge on him.
5'8.25 seems fine to me.
truth said on 7/Jul/16
@Johno he looks to edge out Rob though, 5'8.5 is more than fine.
@Johno he looks to edge out Rob though, 5'8.5 is more than fine.
Johno said on 6/Jul/16
Would probably average 5'8.25; Rob would be a smidge taller.
Would probably average 5'8.25; Rob would be a smidge taller.
S.J.H said on 30/Apr/16
Felton is 5'8 and nothing more
Felton is 5'8 and nothing more
Original said on 26/Apr/16
5'8.5.... Original since sep/2007. Cheers!
5'8.5.... Original since sep/2007. Cheers!
Dee said on 3/Feb/16
Daniel Radcliffe is really short. That might be why Tom kinda towers over him lol
Daniel Radcliffe is really short. That might be why Tom kinda towers over him lol
Stephanie said on 2/Oct/15
Wow. I always thought he was taller than that. He looked so much bigger than Dan in the Harry Potter films. I remember when some sites listed him as 6' 1" after he got his growth spurt (he was shorter than Dan in the first film or two). I guess it was the camera angles.
Wow. I always thought he was taller than that. He looked so much bigger than Dan in the Harry Potter films. I remember when some sites listed him as 6' 1" after he got his growth spurt (he was shorter than Dan in the first film or two). I guess it was the camera angles.
Gregor said on 29/Sep/15
He is 173.999999999999999 or 5'8.5
He is 173.999999999999999 or 5'8.5
D.M said on 23/Aug/15
Tom is 5ft 8.5in its close so we can say 5ft 9in
Tom is 5ft 8.5in its close so we can say 5ft 9in
Hypado said on 24/Feb/15
A Nice photo. Tom Felton's height is 5ft 8.5in (174 cm)
A good listing.
A Nice photo. Tom Felton's height is 5ft 8.5in (174 cm)
A good listing.
LeAlex said on 23/Nov/14
Hey Rob, were you taller than Tom with the footwear advantage?
Editor Rob
Hey Rob, were you taller than Tom with the footwear advantage?
Editor Rob I thought he was very close in height, I took photos of a couple of other people that day so had seen him enough to say he would be near 174 I felt.
Emil 183 cm said on 22/Sep/14
Height181, I can't blame you for believing that lol. I thought that too. The HP cast just happened to be rather short people (which there is nothing wrong with of course)
Height181, I can't blame you for believing that lol. I thought that too. The HP cast just happened to be rather short people (which there is nothing wrong with of course)
Julian said on 24/Jun/14
5'9" flat for him
5'9" flat for him
cole said on 24/May/14
Matthew Lewis - 5ft 11.5in
Tom Felton - 5ft 8.5in
Rupert Grint - 5ft 7.5in
Daniel Radcliffe - 5ft 4.5in
Think that's what they look compared to each other.
Matthew Lewis - 5ft 11.5in
Tom Felton - 5ft 8.5in
Rupert Grint - 5ft 7.5in
Daniel Radcliffe - 5ft 4.5in
Think that's what they look compared to each other.
Alex 6ft 0 said on 14/Apr/14
I could see him edging out Rob barely since Rob is a bit closer to camera and has slight footwear advantage. 5'8.5 I can see
I could see him edging out Rob barely since Rob is a bit closer to camera and has slight footwear advantage. 5'8.5 I can see
185-6 said on 20/Mar/14
5 foot 8.75 inches
5 foot 8.75 inches
avi said on 5/Mar/14
@v
they are very close so i think a 1/4 difference
@v
they are very close so i think a 1/4 difference
the shredder said on 21/Feb/14
I can see 5'9 , Rob is over 5'8 , in front of him and more shoes.
I can see 5'9 , Rob is over 5'8 , in front of him and more shoes.
Realist said on 19/Feb/14
Rob, i think he is 5'8 flat or maybe 5'8.25 is a better shout.
Rob, i think he is 5'8 flat or maybe 5'8.25 is a better shout.
Lorne said on 19/Feb/14
Remember, again that Rob is no less than a full 173cm, and regularly measures 5ft83/8ths on stadia, which is close 5ft8.3. This guy has quarter less footwear so him and Rob, for all practical purposes, would be the same height. Point is, Rob is what you could call solid 173, Felton at 174 would be basically the same height with 7mm less shoe. The 174 is good for him.
Remember, again that Rob is no less than a full 173cm, and regularly measures 5ft83/8ths on stadia, which is close 5ft8.3. This guy has quarter less footwear so him and Rob, for all practical purposes, would be the same height. Point is, Rob is what you could call solid 173, Felton at 174 would be basically the same height with 7mm less shoe. The 174 is good for him.
avi said on 18/Feb/14
@Rob i fail to see how he looks taller here. is it possible he is your height maybe only .2 over? i know about the footwear advantage but that doenst seem to matter as he'd still look your height if he stood closer to cameraEditor Rob
@Rob i fail to see how he looks taller here. is it possible he is your height maybe only .2 over? i know about the footwear advantage but that doenst seem to matter as he'd still look your height if he stood closer to camera
Editor Rob I was there taking photos for a few folk in the queue, so feel that 174 is a good shout just seeing him up close for a couple minutes
Keltoi said on 12/Dec/13
The angle the photo is taken at probably gives the impression that Rob is taller. The camera looks eye level at best though, so you can't really tell who's head is higher. Tom is standing further back as well, which can also make a slight difference, I would imagine.
It comes down to the opinion of Rob in the end, he met him of course, and given his expertise on the subject; then I'd be inclined to agree with him on this one.
The angle the photo is taken at probably gives the impression that Rob is taller. The camera looks eye level at best though, so you can't really tell who's head is higher. Tom is standing further back as well, which can also make a slight difference, I would imagine.
It comes down to the opinion of Rob in the end, he met him of course, and given his expertise on the subject; then I'd be inclined to agree with him on this one.
J.Lee said on 16/Nov/13
Rob, draw a line. Your head is higher than his.
Rob, draw a line. Your head is higher than his.
J.Lee said on 16/Nov/13
Rob if anything u look slightly taller. So how is he half an inch taller than you? You think maybe you downplay your own height?
Editor Rob
Rob if anything u look slightly taller. So how is he half an inch taller than you? You think maybe you downplay your own height?
Editor Rob remember I have a fraction thicker footwear, he was very close to us, so I think him being 174cm is near his mark - I don't think he'd be 5ft 9 or 5ft 8 flat.
Yaspaa said on 4/Sep/13
Yet, Rob felt the need to mention it.
Editor Rob
Yet, Rob felt the need to mention it.
Editor Rob I always mention footwear difference, even small ones, I think 1/4 inch is still worth mentioning, 1/8th inch is maybe harder to even tell at times, because some sneakers/shoes might give anywhere within a range, like 0.75-1 or 1.25-1.4 etc.
it's easier with brands you know.
it's easier with brands you know.
richkid123 said on 14/Aug/13
@avi He looks shorter because he .25 inch less shoe than Rob, and .25 inches taller than someone is basically nothing.
@avi He looks shorter because he .25 inch less shoe than Rob, and .25 inches taller than someone is basically nothing.
KIT KAT said on 23/Jul/13
I THOUGHT HE WAS 6'1 IS HE OR IS HE 5'9?
Editor Rob
I THOUGHT HE WAS 6'1 IS HE OR IS HE 5'9?
Editor Rob if he was 6ft 1 he should have been 5 inches taller than me ;)
avi said on 17/Jul/13
rob why is he looking shorter here? sure he isnt your height. i doubt he is taller than you.
Editor Rob
rob why is he looking shorter here? sure he isnt your height. i doubt he is taller than you.
Editor Rob I think 174 is a good shout for him
Funny said on 3/Jul/13
Why all People say he is smaller ??? I see it everywhere here .... all people saying : No no he or she smaller but nothing know they ! YOU ARE IDIOTS
Why all People say he is smaller ??? I see it everywhere here .... all people saying : No no he or she smaller but nothing know they ! YOU ARE IDIOTS
otep90 said on 3/Jul/13
solid 5'7½'' look rob's upper head.
solid 5'7½'' look rob's upper head.
iTzK1Ng- said on 4/Jun/13
ithought he was my height 5'9
ithought he was my height 5'9
Claire said on 4/Apr/13
Then where I live we must all be giants. I'm 14 as well and my best friends Meghan is 5'11 and still growing. There are plenty taller then her too.
Then where I live we must all be giants. I'm 14 as well and my best friends Meghan is 5'11 and still growing. There are plenty taller then her too.
truth(176-178cm) said on 2/Feb/13
but yeah at 5ft8 you are around 2.5 inches below the norm, I am barely an inch. Still not short unless you are 5ft7 or under.
but yeah at 5ft8 you are around 2.5 inches below the norm, I am barely an inch. Still not short unless you are 5ft7 or under.
truth(176-178cm) said on 2/Feb/13
josh 5ft8 is not the norm for a 14 year old. It is around 5ft5-5ft6. I was 5ft5 at 14, stopped growing at 5ft9.5 at 17.
Felton looks 5ft8-5ft8.5 range just like Rob. Same height.
josh 5ft8 is not the norm for a 14 year old. It is around 5ft5-5ft6. I was 5ft5 at 14, stopped growing at 5ft9.5 at 17.
Felton looks 5ft8-5ft8.5 range just like Rob. Same height.
Joe said on 30/Jan/13
I was 5'8.5 at age 12 and I havent grown since lol
I was 5'8.5 at age 12 and I havent grown since lol
Drew said on 3/Sep/12
I got to meet him at a convention center in texas a few weeks after the premiere of Deathly Hallows Part 2, he looked eye to eye with me, I am a few mm under 5'8.5" at night. I didn't really notice a difference between us.
I got to meet him at a convention center in texas a few weeks after the premiere of Deathly Hallows Part 2, he looked eye to eye with me, I am a few mm under 5'8.5" at night. I didn't really notice a difference between us.
josh said on 27/Aug/12
he's pretty small for his age i'm still 14 and i'm 5'8 already(thanks to my father and other tall relatives)
he's pretty small for his age i'm still 14 and i'm 5'8 already(thanks to my father and other tall relatives)
TNTinFL said on 15/Aug/12
Did he grow since this photo? For some reason, from the Rise of the Planet of the Apes movie, I got the impression he was much taller.
Editor Rob
Did he grow since this photo? For some reason, from the Rise of the Planet of the Apes movie, I got the impression he was much taller.
Editor Rob since he was 21 here and looked same height for previous few years I think he was finished
Stephanie said on 14/Jun/12
That's so weird... everyone was saying he was like 6' 1" back in 2003. He sure looks a lot taller than the main three kids in the Harry Potter movies. If I hadn't seen this picture I would've guessed he was 5' 10". XD
That's so weird... everyone was saying he was like 6' 1" back in 2003. He sure looks a lot taller than the main three kids in the Harry Potter movies. If I hadn't seen this picture I would've guessed he was 5' 10". XD
Crypto139 said on 26/Jan/12
I would say Tom is 5'8.5
On Lopez tonight Click Here
Also George Lopez is 5"10 and most likely one of the tallest claimed 5'10 celebs I seen. So 5'8.5 for Tom is about right.
I would say Tom is 5'8.5
On Lopez tonight Click Here
Also George Lopez is 5"10 and most likely one of the tallest claimed 5'10 celebs I seen. So 5'8.5 for Tom is about right.
Robby D said on 25/Jan/12
Rob. This photo of Tom Felton with Jenny and yourself confirms my height estimation of him. I was looking on another height site the other day and it listed Tom Felton as 6'0", Rupert Grint as 5'10", Daniel Radcliffe as 5'8" and Emma Watson as 5'7". This photograph confirms that Felton who is the tallest of the three is not over 5'9"
Rob. This photo of Tom Felton with Jenny and yourself confirms my height estimation of him. I was looking on another height site the other day and it listed Tom Felton as 6'0", Rupert Grint as 5'10", Daniel Radcliffe as 5'8" and Emma Watson as 5'7". This photograph confirms that Felton who is the tallest of the three is not over 5'9"
Adamz said on 21/Nov/11
174cm is spot on for Tom's afternoon height. I agree.
174cm is spot on for Tom's afternoon height. I agree.
avi said on 19/Nov/11
Rob, i am still trying to find out how he is taller than you. You are 5'5 flat or 5'8 1/8 which is same thing pretty much but he looks shorter than you. Are you judging his height based on this picture or on your view of him that day?? i can buy same height for you two
Editor Rob
Rob, i am still trying to find out how he is taller than you. You are 5'5 flat or 5'8 1/8 which is same thing pretty much but he looks shorter than you. Are you judging his height based on this picture or on your view of him that day?? i can buy same height for you two
Editor Rob I actually took a photo of a friend with Tom before we got an auto with him, and saw him with a few people. I believe he was eye to eye with me, but as I say I'm about 0.3 inch more sneaker.
Adamz said on 16/Nov/11
Rob, is 5-8.5 the tallest Tom can be, even given the shoe difference you guys had in the photograph above?
Editor Rob
Rob, is 5-8.5 the tallest Tom can be, even given the shoe difference you guys had in the photograph above?
Editor Rob I think 174 is still my guess on him as an afternoon height. I'm sure he can clear 5ft 9 from waking.
LAN Jiao said on 10/Nov/11
i remember he was listed 5'10 not long ago.
i remember he was listed 5'10 not long ago.
Zac said on 25/Oct/11
tom felton is the same height as my sister and shes 5 ft 9 and we meet him wondering around a supermarket they were the same height if not i would say my sister that does not wear high heels looked an inche taller he was wearing casual shoes and im 14 years old and 5 foot 4 and still growing i didnt have to look up to him so not to tall
tom felton is the same height as my sister and shes 5 ft 9 and we meet him wondering around a supermarket they were the same height if not i would say my sister that does not wear high heels looked an inche taller he was wearing casual shoes and im 14 years old and 5 foot 4 and still growing i didnt have to look up to him so not to tall
Godred said on 24/Oct/11
@Mimmi -Please get yourself a clue.
@Mimmi -Please get yourself a clue.
Awesomimous said on 13/Oct/11
he was being guessed at 6'1'' because nobody thought daniel radcliffe was 5'5''. since everyone kinda estimated radcliffe at 5'8 or so. everyone else's estimates got bumped up as well.
he was being guessed at 6'1'' because nobody thought daniel radcliffe was 5'5''. since everyone kinda estimated radcliffe at 5'8 or so. everyone else's estimates got bumped up as well.
Alex said on 26/Sep/11
5'8.5 getting guessed at 6'1? WOW
5'8.5 getting guessed at 6'1? WOW
Balthier said on 8/Sep/11
I agree, rounding up just half inch is ok.
I agree, rounding up just half inch is ok.
Shaun said on 6/Sep/11
To be honest him claiming 5'9" there is nothing wrong with that. Most guys round up half an inch anyway and most do not have the precise statometer Rob can to measure themselves to the nearest mm. So it is possible he got measured legitimiately at 5'9" with a book or something in the morning.
To be honest him claiming 5'9" there is nothing wrong with that. Most guys round up half an inch anyway and most do not have the precise statometer Rob can to measure themselves to the nearest mm. So it is possible he got measured legitimiately at 5'9" with a book or something in the morning.
Shaun said on 6/Sep/11
A whisker taller than Rob I think. Could be 5'9" morning but 5'8.5" is fair. He looks a lot better these days, quite a bit like Daniel Craig.
A whisker taller than Rob I think. Could be 5'9" morning but 5'8.5" is fair. He looks a lot better these days, quite a bit like Daniel Craig.
Chris175 said on 5/Sep/11
5-9 range maybe because he is further back in the photo with less shoes
5-9 range maybe because he is further back in the photo with less shoes
Maximus Meridius said on 29/Aug/11
Rob is there any chance he is in the 5ft 9in range.
Editor Rob
Rob is there any chance he is in the 5ft 9in range.
Editor Rob it's not impossible, but 5ft 8.5 range is what I guessed.
Josh B said on 29/Aug/11
@Mimmi
Your height perception is a bit flawed i'm afraid. Maybe knowing James Franco is 5'10.5 will mean you adjust your Felton estimate.
@Mimmi
Your height perception is a bit flawed i'm afraid. Maybe knowing James Franco is 5'10.5 will mean you adjust your Felton estimate.
Mimmi said on 27/Aug/11
When I saw him at the premier of Rise of the Planet of the Apes he did acually look 6'1. He looks around that height too. He was nearly the same as Franco and Franco is what 6'3? trust me Tom is over 6ft that I promise you.
When I saw him at the premier of Rise of the Planet of the Apes he did acually look 6'1. He looks around that height too. He was nearly the same as Franco and Franco is what 6'3? trust me Tom is over 6ft that I promise you.
miko said on 8/Aug/11
Never met personally, but my cousin saw him and Rupert Grint at the Harry Potter premiere and said he (Felton) was shorter than she expected.
I guess Radcliffe being small does give people the impression he's taller.
Never met personally, but my cousin saw him and Rupert Grint at the Harry Potter premiere and said he (Felton) was shorter than she expected.
I guess Radcliffe being small does give people the impression he's taller.
Josh B said on 7/Aug/11
6"0.75 is amazingly unaccurate but the 6"4 for Josh Herdman is the crown jewel of height gauging. :D
6"0.75 is amazingly unaccurate but the 6"4 for Josh Herdman is the crown jewel of height gauging. :D
Adamz said on 6/Aug/11
Tom Felton is age 18 or 22 in the photo here?
Editor Rob
Tom Felton is age 18 or 22 in the photo here?
Editor Rob nearly age 22 in that pic.
Voiceless dental fricative said on 5/Aug/11
A certain other website that shall not be named has him listed at 6'0.75. Such a specific measurement you'd think it'd have to be accurate. LOL.
A certain other website that shall not be named has him listed at 6'0.75. Such a specific measurement you'd think it'd have to be accurate. LOL.
Sophie said on 4/Aug/11
well he probably grew since this picture.
Editor Rob
well he probably grew since this picture.
Editor Rob I don't know many guys who age 18 are the same height at nearly 22 (which he is in this photo) and then suddenly grow ;)
spot on said on 31/Jul/11
Yeah, just met him last weekend when he visited naperville. i'm 5'2.5" and he was wearing shoes with prob an inch like me, and he was just about 6 inches taller
Yeah, just met him last weekend when he visited naperville. i'm 5'2.5" and he was wearing shoes with prob an inch like me, and he was just about 6 inches taller
Mathew said on 17/Jul/11
6'1"? Wow, what an estimate. Anyways, he looks 5'8" - 5'8.5" here.
6'1"? Wow, what an estimate. Anyways, he looks 5'8" - 5'8.5" here.
jake said on 13/Jul/11
5ft8.75 is my guess.
5ft8.75 is my guess.
rob89 said on 16/Jun/11
He may look the same height as Rob or just a hair shorter here at first glance, but that's easily explained by the fact that Rob is closer to the camera and has 1/4 inch thicker shoes. I can certainly buy him being 5'8.5".
He may look the same height as Rob or just a hair shorter here at first glance, but that's easily explained by the fact that Rob is closer to the camera and has 1/4 inch thicker shoes. I can certainly buy him being 5'8.5".
Dave said on 12/Jun/11
Looks exactly the same height as Rob here.
Looks exactly the same height as Rob here.
Benj said on 30/May/11
He looks a whole load taller than Rupert Grint who is apparently only 2 cm smaller- surely one of them must be listed incorrectly.
He looks a whole load taller than Rupert Grint who is apparently only 2 cm smaller- surely one of them must be listed incorrectly.
avi said on 15/May/11
Rob, even with the 1/4 inch less sneaker than you wouldnt he come up to be the same height as you? around a solid 5'8-5'8 1/8?? i think you guys are the same height
Rob, even with the 1/4 inch less sneaker than you wouldnt he come up to be the same height as you? around a solid 5'8-5'8 1/8?? i think you guys are the same height
Miranda said on 8/May/11
I thought he was taller,but he's still cute
I thought he was taller,but he's still cute
Godred said on 6/Apr/11
@ Andy from taiwan - Efron looks short in some photos yet suspiciously tall in others - I`d say lifts on the tall shots.
@ Andy from taiwan - Efron looks short in some photos yet suspiciously tall in others - I`d say lifts on the tall shots.
Andy from Taiwan said on 3/Apr/11
Hey Rob are you pretty sure that Zac Efron and Taylor Lautner are about 173 cm ? They look so tall in many pictures
Hey Rob are you pretty sure that Zac Efron and Taylor Lautner are about 173 cm ? They look so tall in many pictures
feltonfan said on 11/Mar/11
Rob, YOU ARE SO LUCKY TO HAVE MET HIM! I'm super jealous :(
Rob, YOU ARE SO LUCKY TO HAVE MET HIM! I'm super jealous :(
SolidSnake said on 26/Feb/11
have you upgraded him since the photo because he is clearly the same as you Rob?
have you upgraded him since the photo because he is clearly the same as you Rob?
maximus meridius said on 27/Jan/11
He is defiantly 5ft 9in he looks taller due to his slim build.
He is defiantly 5ft 9in he looks taller due to his slim build.
Lenad said on 16/Jan/11
Where these 6'1 guess came from...
Where these 6'1 guess came from...
Close said on 8/Jan/11
Why are you people still arguing about his height??? Rob already took the picture. He is clearly 5'8. Please drop it now
Why are you people still arguing about his height??? Rob already took the picture. He is clearly 5'8. Please drop it now
ACG said on 7/Jan/11
krazy krippled! says on 2/Jan/11
If felton is 6', then Radcliffe is 3', lol!!
That makes no sense....
krazy krippled! says on 2/Jan/11
If felton is 6', then Radcliffe is 3', lol!!
That makes no sense....
krazy krippled! said on 2/Jan/11
If felton is 6', then Radcliffe is 3', lol!!
If felton is 6', then Radcliffe is 3', lol!!
Menace 195cm said on 26/Dec/10
Yeah he is a solid 6'1". (then i would be a solid 205cm)
Yeah he is a solid 6'1". (then i would be a solid 205cm)
KEVIN said on 21/Dec/10
How long is empty? some websites say he is 174 and 185 .... what can we draw conclusions? no serious.
How long is empty? some websites say he is 174 and 185 .... what can we draw conclusions? no serious.
Jaco said on 12/Dec/10
anyone who's seen half blood prince would be left in no doubt as to how tall tom is...snape ie alan rickman had a good two to three inches over him...and rickman's 6'1 or 6' that im sure of...this listing is nonsense and everytime i see it on google i have a good larf...
anyone who's seen half blood prince would be left in no doubt as to how tall tom is...snape ie alan rickman had a good two to three inches over him...and rickman's 6'1 or 6' that im sure of...this listing is nonsense and everytime i see it on google i have a good larf...
Byron T. said on 4/Jul/09
I'd always knew that the 6'1 claims for Tom Felton were outrageous, but 5'8-5'9 seems about right for him. The picture with Rob proves it!
I'd always knew that the 6'1 claims for Tom Felton were outrageous, but 5'8-5'9 seems about right for him. The picture with Rob proves it!
thekiddd said on 3/Jul/09
He's not even close to 5'10" let alone 6'1".
He's not even close to 5'10" let alone 6'1".
Bohm said on 29/Jun/09
Looks 5'9.
Looks 5'9.
Lenad said on 25/Jun/09
A few sites say 6'1 but he's obviously not anywear near that height
A few sites say 6'1 but he's obviously not anywear near that height
Dylan said on 25/Jun/09
Rob looks like he has about a 1/4" advantage over Tom in my opinion.
Rob looks like he has about a 1/4" advantage over Tom in my opinion.
jo said on 24/Jun/09
rob, are you the creator of this site?
Editor Rob
rob, are you the creator of this site?
Editor Rob I made the site yes.
Anonymous said on 24/Jun/09
Actually, the worst claim is 6'1 for Skandar Keynes, the guy who plays Edmund in the Narnia movies. The guy is actually about 5'7.
Actually, the worst claim is 6'1 for Skandar Keynes, the guy who plays Edmund in the Narnia movies. The guy is actually about 5'7.
Vibram said on 24/Jun/09
173cm = 5ft8 flat. He's 21 and looks to have stubble so he's pretty much finished gaining height growth me reckon.
173cm = 5ft8 flat. He's 21 and looks to have stubble so he's pretty much finished gaining height growth me reckon.
micheal said on 23/Jun/09
Thank goodness this finally clears the 6-1 claims, the only claim worse was 5-11 for Corbin Bleu.
Thank goodness this finally clears the 6-1 claims, the only claim worse was 5-11 for Corbin Bleu.
dave said on 23/Jun/09
he only looks tall in the potte films because a few main members of the cast who hes often seen with are infact very small.
he only looks tall in the potte films because a few main members of the cast who hes often seen with are infact very small.
Brandon said on 22/Jun/09
I thought he was taller. He looks tall in the Potter films.
I thought he was taller. He looks tall in the Potter films.
Anonymous said on 21/Jun/09
He looks 5'8.5, I agree. He's pretty much average. 174 is fine, I think. And that would make Rupert at 172 or so. What are these rumors of Rupert being 5'10 or 5'11? Lol.
He looks 5'8.5, I agree. He's pretty much average. 174 is fine, I think. And that would make Rupert at 172 or so. What are these rumors of Rupert being 5'10 or 5'11? Lol.
thekiddd said on 21/Jun/09
The 6'1" claim has simply fooled people on his height. No where near 5'11" let alone 6'1".
The 6'1" claim has simply fooled people on his height. No where near 5'11" let alone 6'1".
miko said on 21/Jun/09
Rob, excuse the pun, he doesn't seem to be standing like he had a broomstick up his ass.
Rob, excuse the pun, he doesn't seem to be standing like he had a broomstick up his ass.
Anonymous said on 20/Jun/09
what kind of shoes did he wear, Rob?
Editor Rob
what kind of shoes did he wear, Rob?
Editor Rob Ivan I had a good 1/4 inch advantage, he had 1.6cm converse low.
Lenad said on 20/Jun/09
6'1 is out there!!
6'1 is out there!!
Lozzer said on 19/Jun/09
5'7.75! He looks shorter than both, regardless of footwear!
5'7.75! He looks shorter than both, regardless of footwear!
Anonymous said on 18/Jun/09
This guy was pegged to be over 6-0 on here. I bet Vibram would peg him at 6-0 in person.
This guy was pegged to be over 6-0 on here. I bet Vibram would peg him at 6-0 in person.
Maribel said on 18/Jun/09
174cm is right.
174cm is right.
James said on 18/Jun/09
Jenny looks 5'10, granted she is closer to the camera than rob.
Jenny looks 5'10, granted she is closer to the camera than rob.
Alex said on 18/Jun/09
Looks more 5'8 flat with Rob.
Looks more 5'8 flat with Rob.
Paddington said on 18/Jun/09
You wouldn't expect many from the Harry Potter gang to be tall. Child actors are prized for short size, so "they can play younger". Most male child actors end up being in the 5'6" to 5'8" range.
You wouldn't expect many from the Harry Potter gang to be tall. Child actors are prized for short size, so "they can play younger". Most male child actors end up being in the 5'6" to 5'8" range.
James said on 18/Jun/09
a good 5'8.5
a good 5'8.5
miko said on 18/Jun/09
Rob I guess this kind of clears up those 6"1 rumours eh!?
I think barefoot you would probably be very close, but Tom might have a few mm's on you.
Rob I guess this kind of clears up those 6"1 rumours eh!?
I think barefoot you would probably be very close, but Tom might have a few mm's on you.
Anonymous said on 20/Apr/09
he probably just seemed really tall in potter movies because he grew faster than the other main actors.
he probably just seemed really tall in potter movies because he grew faster than the other main actors.
anonymous said on 23/Mar/09
how in the hell is he listed as 6 1 then?? im slightly taller than what hes listed as here and i dont think anyone would ever mistake me for a 6 1 person. Perhaps its really what fame can do
how in the hell is he listed as 6 1 then?? im slightly taller than what hes listed as here and i dont think anyone would ever mistake me for a 6 1 person. Perhaps its really what fame can do
Anonymous said on 6/Feb/09
Here's a pic of tom felton with the girls from the H20 series...
Click Here
I know you can't see their shoes. They're probably wearing heels, but Phoebe Tonkin (the dark-haired one) is said to be 5'10"...
Here's a pic of tom felton with the girls from the H20 series...
Click Here
I know you can't see their shoes. They're probably wearing heels, but Phoebe Tonkin (the dark-haired one) is said to be 5'10"...
Mr.X said on 15/Jan/09
nowhere near 6'1...5'85'9 sounds right.
nowhere near 6'1...5'85'9 sounds right.
linebacker40 said on 13/Jan/09
I thought this guy was at least 6', especially in the harry potter films. But I guess that's the illusion films give.
I thought this guy was at least 6', especially in the harry potter films. But I guess that's the illusion films give.
Julie said on 14/Nov/08
I've meet him last year. He was about 5'10.
I've meet him last year. He was about 5'10.
Anonymous said on 25/Oct/08
"he can be 6"0
"he can be 6"0
unknown said on 4/Oct/08
6"1? no way!
maybe 5 "10 yes..but 6"1?
6"1? no way!
maybe 5 "10 yes..but 6"1?
miko said on 8/Sep/08
His magic wand can't seem to make him 6"1.
5"9 it is.
His magic wand can't seem to make him 6"1.
5"9 it is.
lara said on 16/Jul/08
all i can say is i have read every single comment on this blog, every picture taken into considration, shoe size...etc.
and i have decided that tom is only just 5'10, rupert 5'9/5'9.5, emma 5'6, daniel 5'5/5'5.5.
i know i am late, but it is always better to be late than never come at all! :)
plus, i miss all the arguments :P
all i can say is i have read every single comment on this blog, every picture taken into considration, shoe size...etc.
and i have decided that tom is only just 5'10, rupert 5'9/5'9.5, emma 5'6, daniel 5'5/5'5.5.
i know i am late, but it is always better to be late than never come at all! :)
plus, i miss all the arguments :P
Cat said on 5/Jul/08
Cool someone who isnt dissing me for wondering about his weight. I think he might way a little less than 140 lbs Jack, he is really slim.
I wish I had his metabolism.
Cool someone who isnt dissing me for wondering about his weight. I think he might way a little less than 140 lbs Jack, he is really slim.
I wish I had his metabolism.
Jack said on 4/Jul/08
He's probably around 140 lbs., what do you reckon Cat?
He's probably around 140 lbs., what do you reckon Cat?
thekiddd said on 16/May/08
We don't talk about weight on this site sorry to announce. This site is called celebheights not celebweights! If this was celebweights, Rob would be modifying this site all the time ROFL.
We don't talk about weight on this site sorry to announce. This site is called celebheights not celebweights! If this was celebweights, Rob would be modifying this site all the time ROFL.
Cat said on 15/May/08
Hey all,
I know this page is supposed to be about Tom`s height, but I was wondering what he might weigh. What do u think guys?
Hey all,
I know this page is supposed to be about Tom`s height, but I was wondering what he might weigh. What do u think guys?
thekiddd said on 14/May/08
The Fan who guessed 6'1" was probably wearing a blindfold when submitting it. If he is 6'1", than Alan Rickman is 6'5"! LMAO!
The Fan who guessed 6'1" was probably wearing a blindfold when submitting it. If he is 6'1", than Alan Rickman is 6'5"! LMAO!
Anonymous said on 5/Apr/08
i seen him listed as 6'1" wich is way out i reackon maybe 5'9" possibly 5'10" but i think that may be stretching it.
i seen him listed as 6'1" wich is way out i reackon maybe 5'9" possibly 5'10" but i think that may be stretching it.
umad80 said on 24/Mar/08
Well, if Ben Lyons is 6'3" like he claims and Tom is just under his eyes, then Tom has a better chance of being 5'10". I think that's about right. I mean, in 2005 if he was 5'9" he was 16/17 (depending on when he claimed 5'9" because his birthday is in September) he could've easily grown another inch. Rupert is closer to Tom's height, I think around 5'9", because at the OotP premiere Tom was only about an inch taller. I think Tom had the better footwear, probably only giving him around a half inch more, maybe just a bit less. Click Here , Click Here , Click Here and for good measure, here is Tom's shoes: Click Here - and of course, remember Rupert was wearing chucks.
Well, if Ben Lyons is 6'3" like he claims and Tom is just under his eyes, then Tom has a better chance of being 5'10". I think that's about right. I mean, in 2005 if he was 5'9" he was 16/17 (depending on when he claimed 5'9" because his birthday is in September) he could've easily grown another inch. Rupert is closer to Tom's height, I think around 5'9", because at the OotP premiere Tom was only about an inch taller. I think Tom had the better footwear, probably only giving him around a half inch more, maybe just a bit less. Click Here , Click Here , Click Here and for good measure, here is Tom's shoes: Click Here - and of course, remember Rupert was wearing chucks.
Anonymous said on 24/Mar/08
Oh, but come on, Emma hasn't grown! According to some, she is still 4'10" and I find these sources to be very reliable!...psh, 5'5"; please stop smoking the reefer, we do not know what you are talking about. And those who say 5'6", ah no, please do not even be on the same webpage as them honey; they may contaminate you with their dirty ideals....
Oh, but come on, Emma hasn't grown! According to some, she is still 4'10" and I find these sources to be very reliable!...psh, 5'5"; please stop smoking the reefer, we do not know what you are talking about. And those who say 5'6", ah no, please do not even be on the same webpage as them honey; they may contaminate you with their dirty ideals....
thekiddd said on 23/Mar/08
Rupert is basically 5'8". It's funny because all of them have grown expect for Radcliffe lol.
Rupert is basically 5'8". It's funny because all of them have grown expect for Radcliffe lol.
mimi said on 23/Mar/08
tom is 5'9.5,emma is 5'5 (she wear heels all the time during red carpet),dan is 5'5,rupert 5'8.5
tom is 5'9.5,emma is 5'5 (she wear heels all the time during red carpet),dan is 5'5,rupert 5'8.5
thekiddd said on 13/Mar/08
People thought Radcliffe was 5'9" so they made that 6'1 guess. But Danny boy is super short. Barely taller than Emma Watson.
People thought Radcliffe was 5'9" so they made that 6'1 guess. But Danny boy is super short. Barely taller than Emma Watson.
umad80 said on 22/Jan/08
Tom's height is dependent on how tall Rupert is. I personally believe that Rupert is 5'9" or there about. Click Here - Tom seems to be about a half inch taller than Rupert. Maybe a little over. These are the shoes Tom was wearing that night: Click Here - compared to Rupert's chucks. Looking at those shoes, Tom probably had an advantage. If Tom is 5'9", then so is Rupert (or at least pretty close to it). The only way for Rupert to be at the height listed here is that Tom is in noway near 5'9" but actually more 5'8". But if he was barely 5'8" back in 2003, that means he barely grew since 15/16 years old.
Tom's height is dependent on how tall Rupert is. I personally believe that Rupert is 5'9" or there about. Click Here - Tom seems to be about a half inch taller than Rupert. Maybe a little over. These are the shoes Tom was wearing that night: Click Here - compared to Rupert's chucks. Looking at those shoes, Tom probably had an advantage. If Tom is 5'9", then so is Rupert (or at least pretty close to it). The only way for Rupert to be at the height listed here is that Tom is in noway near 5'9" but actually more 5'8". But if he was barely 5'8" back in 2003, that means he barely grew since 15/16 years old.
Robbie H said on 21/Jan/08
jason issaacs is not even in the prisoner of azkaban, and felton would only of been 15 in that, i think 5'10-11 for tom
jason issaacs is not even in the prisoner of azkaban, and felton would only of been 15 in that, i think 5'10-11 for tom
Anonymous said on 17/Jan/08
maxiumus says on 17/Jan/08 he is actually 6ft 1in in the prisoner of azkaban he was taller than jason isaac who was 5ft 11in
maxiumus says on 17/Jan/08 he is actually 6ft 1in in the prisoner of azkaban he was taller than jason isaac who was 5ft 11in
Nik said on 29/Dec/07
There's no way Tom is only 5-9. I'd say he's 5-11 to 6-0
There's no way Tom is only 5-9. I'd say he's 5-11 to 6-0
JK said on 3/Nov/07
He looks more 5'8'', close enough to 5'9''
He looks more 5'8'', close enough to 5'9''
Anonymous said on 2/Nov/07
Rob, you honestly don't think he's grown at all since 2005? He must be a little taller by now, maybe 5'10"
Rob, you honestly don't think he's grown at all since 2005? He must be a little taller by now, maybe 5'10"
Deryck said on 25/Oct/07
eh, you people, why do you keep on arguing about such unrelevant events, for gods sake. I see that Anna is keen on grammar or it turned to a linguistic race? :)umad, you better post a picture of named person with somebody of certain height,could you?
eh, you people, why do you keep on arguing about such unrelevant events, for gods sake. I see that Anna is keen on grammar or it turned to a linguistic race? :)umad, you better post a picture of named person with somebody of certain height,could you?
umad80 said on 17/Oct/07
Oh, I think there definitely needs to be some adjustment. I know Rob will be fair and if he sees proof of Rupert's height, he'll change it. My only concern is that when I kept showing pictures of them in their barefeet and Rupert had four inches on them both, he only said "that moment in time." :p It'll be interesting though, right? Because we only know Tom gave a 5'9" listing in 2005. He definitely could've grown since then for sure. I know a lot of people don't believe it, but I'm convinced that Rupert is in the 5'9" range.
Oh, I think there definitely needs to be some adjustment. I know Rob will be fair and if he sees proof of Rupert's height, he'll change it. My only concern is that when I kept showing pictures of them in their barefeet and Rupert had four inches on them both, he only said "that moment in time." :p It'll be interesting though, right? Because we only know Tom gave a 5'9" listing in 2005. He definitely could've grown since then for sure. I know a lot of people don't believe it, but I'm convinced that Rupert is in the 5'9" range.
Evanna said on 17/Oct/07
Yeah, I believe that all HP heights need some slight adjustment. According to this site, the height difference between Felton and Grint is 1.25", while in reality it's obviously less than an inch. And we've seen enough pictures of Grint being at least three inches taller than Radcliffe & Watson. But I wouldn't worry too much, if Grint is indeed 5'8"+ Rob will eventually upgrade him. Plus, there is a possibility that Grint's listing is spot on, and that all the others are slightly shorter than listed here. I guess we won't know for sure until Rob or Glenn or one of us gets photographed with them. Remember the Devon Murray case?! :)
Yeah, I believe that all HP heights need some slight adjustment. According to this site, the height difference between Felton and Grint is 1.25", while in reality it's obviously less than an inch. And we've seen enough pictures of Grint being at least three inches taller than Radcliffe & Watson. But I wouldn't worry too much, if Grint is indeed 5'8"+ Rob will eventually upgrade him. Plus, there is a possibility that Grint's listing is spot on, and that all the others are slightly shorter than listed here. I guess we won't know for sure until Rob or Glenn or one of us gets photographed with them. Remember the Devon Murray case?! :)
umad80 said on 16/Oct/07
So when I said "Now you're from the UK?" I was correct. She changes everything. Height, age, sex, location... Little did "she" know that Rob could easily check her IP to see where she was posting. I was going to ask him, but I didn't want to seem like I was starting something. I wonder now if "Anna" will come back with a different name, location, gender, age, height since she's leaving. But I bet you she'll be on the bandwagon of Rupert being under 5'7" 'cause she's so ticked that Emma was proven to only be 5'5".
But to be good and keep on topic, I think we can honestly say that Tom is 5'9" and that Rupert is a strong 5'8" and probably close to 5'9" when you take into account the possible shoe difference and Rupert's lean/slouch: Click Here
So when I said "Now you're from the UK?" I was correct. She changes everything. Height, age, sex, location... Little did "she" know that Rob could easily check her IP to see where she was posting. I was going to ask him, but I didn't want to seem like I was starting something. I wonder now if "Anna" will come back with a different name, location, gender, age, height since she's leaving. But I bet you she'll be on the bandwagon of Rupert being under 5'7" 'cause she's so ticked that Emma was proven to only be 5'5".
But to be good and keep on topic, I think we can honestly say that Tom is 5'9" and that Rupert is a strong 5'8" and probably close to 5'9" when you take into account the possible shoe difference and Rupert's lean/slouch: Click Here
Evanna said on 16/Oct/07
umad80 you're going to absolutely love this. Please check out Eliah Wood's page, especially the latest 4-5 posts! :D
umad80 you're going to absolutely love this. Please check out Eliah Wood's page, especially the latest 4-5 posts! :D
umad80 said on 16/Oct/07
But surely, I jest. I mean, that's what you do when attacking, right?
Pay attention. Rupert is leaning in the pic and thus would have less height to Tom and the fact that we don't know what Tom has in shoe to Rupert is another. Gee, someone's surely sore that it got proven that Emma is nowhere near 5'6". I also am amused that now that Emma is proven to be 5'5", your personal mission is to now lower Rupert's height when just not too long ago you thought Tom could be taller than 5'9". Amused.
But surely, I jest. I mean, that's what you do when attacking, right?
Pay attention. Rupert is leaning in the pic and thus would have less height to Tom and the fact that we don't know what Tom has in shoe to Rupert is another. Gee, someone's surely sore that it got proven that Emma is nowhere near 5'6". I also am amused that now that Emma is proven to be 5'5", your personal mission is to now lower Rupert's height when just not too long ago you thought Tom could be taller than 5'9". Amused.
Anna said on 15/Oct/07
Okay, thanks for the fantastic tip umad80, clearly you are from the U.S.. Nevertheless, I will certainly take it to heart. But the thing is, as you clearly jest, I jest not And what I find qutie amusing is the fact that you don't even consider that Tom has got actual, physical, head above his hair line. That's not just spiked hair, that's his actual head. Furthermore, look at Rupert's eyes and then Tom's eyes....Tom clearly is at least one inch taller, thus validating Rupert's current listing. And, you are rather rude. It's one thing to playfully mock (I suggest a laugh or wink be added to the end of the statement, actually) someone's lack of intelligence, but to blatantly say one has not one ounce of intelligence is utterly unacceptable. You ought to know this common respect, surely? And I had better pick it up if that's the way I come across, your comment certainly diminished my self-esteem. But thanks for the lovely compliment nonetheless. :)
Okay, thanks for the fantastic tip umad80, clearly you are from the U.S.. Nevertheless, I will certainly take it to heart. But the thing is, as you clearly jest, I jest not And what I find qutie amusing is the fact that you don't even consider that Tom has got actual, physical, head above his hair line. That's not just spiked hair, that's his actual head. Furthermore, look at Rupert's eyes and then Tom's eyes....Tom clearly is at least one inch taller, thus validating Rupert's current listing. And, you are rather rude. It's one thing to playfully mock (I suggest a laugh or wink be added to the end of the statement, actually) someone's lack of intelligence, but to blatantly say one has not one ounce of intelligence is utterly unacceptable. You ought to know this common respect, surely? And I had better pick it up if that's the way I come across, your comment certainly diminished my self-esteem. But thanks for the lovely compliment nonetheless. :)
umad80 said on 8/Oct/07
Evanna, hehe. Someone who lives in a glass house should not throw stones, am I right? Some people should learn that.
Anna, here is a little tip in joking online. No one can see your face or hear your tone, so you should add a laugh or a wink. Otherwise it looks like you're trying to backtrack in order to look better. Then you try to further derail everyone from noticing your rudeness by attacking one's sentence structure and grammatical error on the internet.
Of course if you had one ounce of intelligence, you'd have noticed that I did actually respond to the idea that Rupert isn't much taller than Daniel Radcliffe. I wouldn't have 'freaked out', but would have calmly stated, just as I did, my feelings. And you of course insist that I'm obsessively talking about Rupert being 5'9" when you have not stopped obsessively talking about Emma being over 5'6" when people have proven that she is under said mark.
But clearly I jest.
However, let's get back to the discussion at hand. To prove that Tom is not over 6' here are a few pictures with Rupert which also coincidently should prove that Rupert is over 5'8". This is from a video taken by harrypotterdeluxe.com. Click Here and Click Here - not sure how this works exactly, but yeah, Rupert would probably have the advantage, but you can tell he's taller so he wouldn't be that much shorter than Tom.
Then you have pictures from the UK premiere where Rupert is leaning and Tom sometimes is closer to the camera and most likely has the show advantage. Click Here and Click Here
Evanna, hehe. Someone who lives in a glass house should not throw stones, am I right? Some people should learn that.
Anna, here is a little tip in joking online. No one can see your face or hear your tone, so you should add a laugh or a wink. Otherwise it looks like you're trying to backtrack in order to look better. Then you try to further derail everyone from noticing your rudeness by attacking one's sentence structure and grammatical error on the internet.
Of course if you had one ounce of intelligence, you'd have noticed that I did actually respond to the idea that Rupert isn't much taller than Daniel Radcliffe. I wouldn't have 'freaked out', but would have calmly stated, just as I did, my feelings. And you of course insist that I'm obsessively talking about Rupert being 5'9" when you have not stopped obsessively talking about Emma being over 5'6" when people have proven that she is under said mark.
But clearly I jest.
However, let's get back to the discussion at hand. To prove that Tom is not over 6' here are a few pictures with Rupert which also coincidently should prove that Rupert is over 5'8". This is from a video taken by harrypotterdeluxe.com. Click Here and Click Here - not sure how this works exactly, but yeah, Rupert would probably have the advantage, but you can tell he's taller so he wouldn't be that much shorter than Tom.
Then you have pictures from the UK premiere where Rupert is leaning and Tom sometimes is closer to the camera and most likely has the show advantage. Click Here and Click Here
Anna said on 6/Oct/07
Evanna, I was joking and what I absolutely love is how you read my comments to find an error. However, thanks for bringing that awful sentence up, what was I trying to say? That's rubbish. I'm ashamed to have writ that.
Evanna, I was joking and what I absolutely love is how you read my comments to find an error. However, thanks for bringing that awful sentence up, what was I trying to say? That's rubbish. I'm ashamed to have writ that.
Evanna said on 4/Oct/07
Anna give us a break with grammar and stuff. Here's a quote from your own comment posted on 3/Oct/07 (Grint's page): "Not that I don't entirely disagree..." etc. Anyway this is not a literacy contest.
Anna give us a break with grammar and stuff. Here's a quote from your own comment posted on 3/Oct/07 (Grint's page): "Not that I don't entirely disagree..." etc. Anyway this is not a literacy contest.
Anna said on 3/Oct/07
Exactly, although I giggle silently at your grammatical error, "This is suppose to be fun." Incorrect. This is SUPPOSED to be fun and, that's exactly what the case is. I was just having a bit of a laugh with you, you know, joking ever so slightly. Because you must admit, you will not back away from claiming Rupert 5'9" or always taller than he seems to be. Perhaps you have a bet going on? Anyway, i've got a question, is slightly joking with a person no longer permitted on this site? Has Rob said something regarding this new rule? I have not seen anything, so I suppose I am alright for the moment, but, umad80, you must admit, you wanted to freak out and if I hadn't said that, you would have writ something in response to Gaby's claiming Rupert one centimetre above Dan. Am I right or am I correct?
Exactly, although I giggle silently at your grammatical error, "This is suppose to be fun." Incorrect. This is SUPPOSED to be fun and, that's exactly what the case is. I was just having a bit of a laugh with you, you know, joking ever so slightly. Because you must admit, you will not back away from claiming Rupert 5'9" or always taller than he seems to be. Perhaps you have a bet going on? Anyway, i've got a question, is slightly joking with a person no longer permitted on this site? Has Rob said something regarding this new rule? I have not seen anything, so I suppose I am alright for the moment, but, umad80, you must admit, you wanted to freak out and if I hadn't said that, you would have writ something in response to Gaby's claiming Rupert one centimetre above Dan. Am I right or am I correct?
umad80 said on 2/Oct/07
Anna, grow up. This is suppose to be fun.
The only way for Rupert to be that height is if Tom is 5'7.5" because Rupert only looked to be about a half inch shorter. So if Tom is 5'8.5" then Rupert is 5'8" and if Tom is 5'9", then Rupert is 5'8.5". I think he's a legit 5'9" and could be around 5'10" and I think Rupert is 5'9". It may not be strong, but it's there.
And of course Dan is 5'5" and Emma is 5'5" or slightly over. It's always Rupert that's a bit hard to tell. And there was also a video of Tom and Rupert shaking hands and they were pretty much eye level. So the only way Rupert could be in the 5'7" range is if Tom is too.
Anna, grow up. This is suppose to be fun.
The only way for Rupert to be that height is if Tom is 5'7.5" because Rupert only looked to be about a half inch shorter. So if Tom is 5'8.5" then Rupert is 5'8" and if Tom is 5'9", then Rupert is 5'8.5". I think he's a legit 5'9" and could be around 5'10" and I think Rupert is 5'9". It may not be strong, but it's there.
And of course Dan is 5'5" and Emma is 5'5" or slightly over. It's always Rupert that's a bit hard to tell. And there was also a video of Tom and Rupert shaking hands and they were pretty much eye level. So the only way Rupert could be in the 5'7" range is if Tom is too.
JK said on 29/Sep/07
Original, I kind of agree with all of your listings
Original, I kind of agree with all of your listings
Anna said on 29/Sep/07
No way gaby, no way. Dan 1 cm shorter than Rupert? Umad80 will freak out at you. Just hope she doesn't read this page anytime soon...As for Tom, he's 5'10" at the most. 6'1" is quite ridiculous. That would put Emma Watson at about 5'9" or 5'10", lmao.
No way gaby, no way. Dan 1 cm shorter than Rupert? Umad80 will freak out at you. Just hope she doesn't read this page anytime soon...As for Tom, he's 5'10" at the most. 6'1" is quite ridiculous. That would put Emma Watson at about 5'9" or 5'10", lmao.
Original said on 29/Sep/07
6'1" it's IMPOSSIBLE
He's 5'8.5" or 5'9"
Daniel is 5'5" or 5'5.5"
Emma is a 5'5" or slighty under
And Rupert is a 5'7" or 5'7.5"
6'1" it's IMPOSSIBLE
He's 5'8.5" or 5'9"
Daniel is 5'5" or 5'5.5"
Emma is a 5'5" or slighty under
And Rupert is a 5'7" or 5'7.5"
gaby said on 29/Sep/07
i think Tom Felton height is 6'1", like his girlfriend, Melissa...
tom: 185 cm
daniel: 168 cm
emma: 167 cm
rupert: 169 cm
tom you are the best...
Maybe...???
i think Tom Felton height is 6'1", like his girlfriend, Melissa...
tom: 185 cm
daniel: 168 cm
emma: 167 cm
rupert: 169 cm
tom you are the best...
Maybe...???
umad80 said on 15/Sep/07
God. Does anyone know how big an inch is? It's not big at all. He is not under 5'8" and the pics with Tom prove that since Tom is definitely a legit 5'9".
God. Does anyone know how big an inch is? It's not big at all. He is not under 5'8" and the pics with Tom prove that since Tom is definitely a legit 5'9".
Anna said on 15/Sep/07
Yeah, that's quite accurate in my opinion umad, quite accurate indeed. He's surely nothing under 5'9".
Yeah, that's quite accurate in my opinion umad, quite accurate indeed. He's surely nothing under 5'9".
JK said on 15/Sep/07
Im sorry but Rupert just does not give me the impression of being a 5'8'' guy, the more pics i see of him the more he looks shorter... I think 5'7.5'' is generous coming from me
Im sorry but Rupert just does not give me the impression of being a 5'8'' guy, the more pics i see of him the more he looks shorter... I think 5'7.5'' is generous coming from me
umad80 said on 14/Sep/07
JK, I don't think she was starting. Just a little late to the party, so to speak. So, does that mean you're considering that Rupert is indeed taller than 5'7"/5'7.5"?
Anna, I agree that Tom is probably closer to 5'10" by now. I mean, I realize in 2005 he was probably close in not growing, but it is possible to grow beyond 18. Probably not something that happens all the time, but it does happen and I think he was 17/18 in 2005. His birthday is on the later side, so depending on when this fact sheet came out, he may have still be 17 at the time and could have grown. For all we know, it could've been written in 2004 but not published until 2005. Just a few things to throw out there. But nonetheless he does look a legit 5'9"/5'10" to me.
JK, I don't think she was starting. Just a little late to the party, so to speak. So, does that mean you're considering that Rupert is indeed taller than 5'7"/5'7.5"?
Anna, I agree that Tom is probably closer to 5'10" by now. I mean, I realize in 2005 he was probably close in not growing, but it is possible to grow beyond 18. Probably not something that happens all the time, but it does happen and I think he was 17/18 in 2005. His birthday is on the later side, so depending on when this fact sheet came out, he may have still be 17 at the time and could have grown. For all we know, it could've been written in 2004 but not published until 2005. Just a few things to throw out there. But nonetheless he does look a legit 5'9"/5'10" to me.
JK said on 12/Sep/07
Anna things have cooled down between me and umad80 so don't start arguments like a little kid!
Anna things have cooled down between me and umad80 so don't start arguments like a little kid!
Anna said on 11/Sep/07
Yeah umad80, I totally agree with you. I find it very hard to believe that Tom is anything under 5'9", seeing as he definitely looks 5'9" to 5'10" in photos and the new movie. I think he is probably closer to 5'10" now actually. And your photo of Tom and Jamie just proves that JK is being utterly ridiculous because he without a doubt thinks Jamie is 6'2.5" or 6'3". 6'3'' JK says on 12/Jun/07
He must be very close to 6'3'' i think
So he, although he has said he does not have a hatred toward Rupert Grint, must indeed hate him because he is just being totoally crazy and random. And, umad80 you may find this interesting. You know how JK always thinks celebrities lie about their heights and are always shorter than even what Rob has them listed at? Well, he's been commenting quite a bit on Miley Cyrus's page (who is nearly 15 and 5'4", thus most likely nearly done growing) and seems to think she will grow to be 5'8" or 5'9"...isn't that crazy and totally random? I just don't get his logic...do you?
Yeah umad80, I totally agree with you. I find it very hard to believe that Tom is anything under 5'9", seeing as he definitely looks 5'9" to 5'10" in photos and the new movie. I think he is probably closer to 5'10" now actually. And your photo of Tom and Jamie just proves that JK is being utterly ridiculous because he without a doubt thinks Jamie is 6'2.5" or 6'3". 6'3'' JK says on 12/Jun/07
He must be very close to 6'3'' i think
So he, although he has said he does not have a hatred toward Rupert Grint, must indeed hate him because he is just being totoally crazy and random. And, umad80 you may find this interesting. You know how JK always thinks celebrities lie about their heights and are always shorter than even what Rob has them listed at? Well, he's been commenting quite a bit on Miley Cyrus's page (who is nearly 15 and 5'4", thus most likely nearly done growing) and seems to think she will grow to be 5'8" or 5'9"...isn't that crazy and totally random? I just don't get his logic...do you?
umad80 said on 9/Sep/07
Hehe Anna. Don't forget too that Tom's shoe could've given a half inch advantage to him, meaning that the show gave an inch and Rupert's gives a half inch, Tom had a half inch in shoe advantage.
Look, I just think a photo from November 2005 of Jamie and Tom says a lot. In order for the 5'8" to be true, Jamie would not be the 6'2.5" he claimed at that time. He was a solid 4.5"-5" taller, possibly more due to the angle of the pic, than Tom in that picture. He could only actually be 6' or so then for Tom to be only 5'8" now. And that can't possibly be right considering there are pictures of him and the twins around that time and any height difference was barely noticable. Plus he was taller than the 6'1" Robert Pattinson. So the 6'2.5" claim definitely wasn't wrong.
You also used this photo: Click Here just back in late July. You said it proved he was 5'9". lol It really pretty much does. Both he and Jamie are slouching considerably, so they have smiliar posture. You can tell there is not much difference. If Jamie is 6'3" by now... I don't know if 6 inches is really accurate, but he's definitely not 5'8" as 7 inches is rediculous since they have similiar posture. So I think anywhere from 5'9" to 5'10" isn't out of the realm of possibility.
Hehe Anna. Don't forget too that Tom's shoe could've given a half inch advantage to him, meaning that the show gave an inch and Rupert's gives a half inch, Tom had a half inch in shoe advantage.
Look, I just think a photo from November 2005 of Jamie and Tom says a lot. In order for the 5'8" to be true, Jamie would not be the 6'2.5" he claimed at that time. He was a solid 4.5"-5" taller, possibly more due to the angle of the pic, than Tom in that picture. He could only actually be 6' or so then for Tom to be only 5'8" now. And that can't possibly be right considering there are pictures of him and the twins around that time and any height difference was barely noticable. Plus he was taller than the 6'1" Robert Pattinson. So the 6'2.5" claim definitely wasn't wrong.
You also used this photo: Click Here just back in late July. You said it proved he was 5'9". lol It really pretty much does. Both he and Jamie are slouching considerably, so they have smiliar posture. You can tell there is not much difference. If Jamie is 6'3" by now... I don't know if 6 inches is really accurate, but he's definitely not 5'8" as 7 inches is rediculous since they have similiar posture. So I think anywhere from 5'9" to 5'10" isn't out of the realm of possibility.
JK said on 9/Sep/07
I think things have cooled down between me and umad80, and yes Anna to me Tom looks 5'8'' and no it is not obvuious that Rupert is a strong 5'8''
I think things have cooled down between me and umad80, and yes Anna to me Tom looks 5'8'' and no it is not obvuious that Rupert is a strong 5'8''
Anna said on 9/Sep/07
haha, Tom now looks 5'8" maximum to you because Rupert looked no more than an inch shorter than him. That's quite hilarious and peculiar, why do you care if Rupert is not your beloved 5'7"? Is it not obvious that he is easily a strong 5'8"?
haha, Tom now looks 5'8" maximum to you because Rupert looked no more than an inch shorter than him. That's quite hilarious and peculiar, why do you care if Rupert is not your beloved 5'7"? Is it not obvious that he is easily a strong 5'8"?
JK said on 7/Sep/07
Well if did do it before i have apologized for it and now i don't do it, if you think Tom is 5'9'', 5'10'', 5'11'', or even 6'0'' fine i don't care because thats your opinion, but to me Tom does not look more than 5'8''
Well if did do it before i have apologized for it and now i don't do it, if you think Tom is 5'9'', 5'10'', 5'11'', or even 6'0'' fine i don't care because thats your opinion, but to me Tom does not look more than 5'8''
umad80 said on 7/Sep/07
Exacty JK. But Tom didn't shrink since 2005. I'm not sure I get your point. Heh He probably has him by 7 inches now, but at the time Jamie said he was 6'2.5". And as I said, Tom didn't shrink. So this proves that the 5'9" one is pretty accurate. Even if Tom didn't grow and Jamie did, Tom would still be 5'9".
And I don't get "hot". It just preplexes me that you would go to great lengths to prove that Rupert is 5'7" when it's clear that anyone who has seen him in person puts him well above that. And no, 5'7" is nowhere near 5'8" unless he's 5'7.99" or something. lol
And actually you've disrespected my opinion countless times. "Rupert is not 5'10" LMAO!!!" "You're the one saying he's 5'11"!!" (I still don't where you got that) and don't forget the latest where you started cussing everyone out who didn't agree with you and Rob had to say something to you. So please don't say you haven't disrespected my opinion when you have.
I just think it's pretty obvious that by that picture he is 5'9". It's the same year he gave that exact height listing. Meaning that Rupert could very well be 5'9" or there about. And that's if you don't wonder if he's slouching and whatnot. Sometimes it's hard to tell with him because of he carries himself. But, I think it's pretty obvious that Tom is definitely 5'9".
Exacty JK. But Tom didn't shrink since 2005. I'm not sure I get your point. Heh He probably has him by 7 inches now, but at the time Jamie said he was 6'2.5". And as I said, Tom didn't shrink. So this proves that the 5'9" one is pretty accurate. Even if Tom didn't grow and Jamie did, Tom would still be 5'9".
And I don't get "hot". It just preplexes me that you would go to great lengths to prove that Rupert is 5'7" when it's clear that anyone who has seen him in person puts him well above that. And no, 5'7" is nowhere near 5'8" unless he's 5'7.99" or something. lol
And actually you've disrespected my opinion countless times. "Rupert is not 5'10" LMAO!!!" "You're the one saying he's 5'11"!!" (I still don't where you got that) and don't forget the latest where you started cussing everyone out who didn't agree with you and Rob had to say something to you. So please don't say you haven't disrespected my opinion when you have.
I just think it's pretty obvious that by that picture he is 5'9". It's the same year he gave that exact height listing. Meaning that Rupert could very well be 5'9" or there about. And that's if you don't wonder if he's slouching and whatnot. Sometimes it's hard to tell with him because of he carries himself. But, I think it's pretty obvious that Tom is definitely 5'9".
JK said on 7/Sep/07
That picture was from november 2005, I think Jamie has grown more since then because he was only 16 or 17 and nowadays Jamie has Tom by 7 inches minimum, umad80 why do you get hot when i say that Rupert is 5'7''???? I mean isn't 5'7'' close to 5'8''? I don't disrespect your opinions so don't talk trash about me continuously
That picture was from november 2005, I think Jamie has grown more since then because he was only 16 or 17 and nowadays Jamie has Tom by 7 inches minimum, umad80 why do you get hot when i say that Rupert is 5'7''???? I mean isn't 5'7'' close to 5'8''? I don't disrespect your opinions so don't talk trash about me continuously
umad80 said on 6/Sep/07
Tom is definitely around 5'9" or 5'10" now. It is possible for him to grow an inch in a year (depending on when that fact file came out). I'd have to agree with Anna that making Tom 5'7" would make Dan just a few inches above 5' and since we know that Devon Murray is 5'2", Dan is definitely around 5'5" because he was taller than him at the GoF London premiere.
Btw Hugo, I wouldn't be too happy about JK agreeing with you. If you look at their past posts they were adament about Tom being 5'9". Until a picture came out with Rupert that showed barely any height difference and shoes could be a factor. Thus proving that Rupert was taller than his 5'6.5" to 5'7" range JK has put Rupert in.
Look at this... we know Jamie is close to 6'3" (give or take) and in this pic he is definitely closer to the camera, but there is like at least 4 inches between he and Tom. Click Here and that was taken during GoF. So I think it's possible to say that Tom is a strong 5'9".
Tom is definitely around 5'9" or 5'10" now. It is possible for him to grow an inch in a year (depending on when that fact file came out). I'd have to agree with Anna that making Tom 5'7" would make Dan just a few inches above 5' and since we know that Devon Murray is 5'2", Dan is definitely around 5'5" because he was taller than him at the GoF London premiere.
Btw Hugo, I wouldn't be too happy about JK agreeing with you. If you look at their past posts they were adament about Tom being 5'9". Until a picture came out with Rupert that showed barely any height difference and shoes could be a factor. Thus proving that Rupert was taller than his 5'6.5" to 5'7" range JK has put Rupert in.
Look at this... we know Jamie is close to 6'3" (give or take) and in this pic he is definitely closer to the camera, but there is like at least 4 inches between he and Tom. Click Here and that was taken during GoF. So I think it's possible to say that Tom is a strong 5'9".
Anna said on 1/Sep/07
What a load of rubbish. lol, 5'7" for Tom Felton? What would that put Dan Radlciffe at then, 5'2" or 5'3"? That seems quite unlikely to me, even edging on the brink of impossible. Tom looked absolutely huge compared to Dan in PoA and GoF and like Maya said, he has not looked much smaller than Jason Isaacs since GoF, which makes me believe that he is probably closer to 5'10" now.
What a load of rubbish. lol, 5'7" for Tom Felton? What would that put Dan Radlciffe at then, 5'2" or 5'3"? That seems quite unlikely to me, even edging on the brink of impossible. Tom looked absolutely huge compared to Dan in PoA and GoF and like Maya said, he has not looked much smaller than Jason Isaacs since GoF, which makes me believe that he is probably closer to 5'10" now.
Hugo said on 29/Aug/07
JK, thanks for agreeing with me. It's not impossible for Felton to be 5'7". He just doesn't look 5'9".
JK, thanks for agreeing with me. It's not impossible for Felton to be 5'7". He just doesn't look 5'9".
Maya said on 29/Aug/07
Tom has been at least 5'9" since GoF. He towered over Dan and was just slightly shorter than his "dad" Jason Isaacs (5'11"). I don't think he's grown, but it is also unlikely that he shrunk.
Tom has been at least 5'9" since GoF. He towered over Dan and was just slightly shorter than his "dad" Jason Isaacs (5'11"). I don't think he's grown, but it is also unlikely that he shrunk.
Anna said on 28/Aug/07
Are you two just going off the photos with Rupert Grint? Or were there photos of TOm with other actors?
Are you two just going off the photos with Rupert Grint? Or were there photos of TOm with other actors?
JK said on 28/Aug/07
"In pics mid 2003 he was barely 5ft 8 back then...late 2004 he looked a little taller" - Rob that puts him at 5'8.5'', i doubt he got taller than that because he looked the same height in every potter film since prisoner of azkaban, so i think its time to downgrade him by half an inch, and That would put Rupert Grint at 5'7'' so it all makes sense
"In pics mid 2003 he was barely 5ft 8 back then...late 2004 he looked a little taller" - Rob that puts him at 5'8.5'', i doubt he got taller than that because he looked the same height in every potter film since prisoner of azkaban, so i think its time to downgrade him by half an inch, and That would put Rupert Grint at 5'7'' so it all makes sense
JK said on 28/Aug/07
Finally someone agrees with me, I think the same thing Hugo
Finally someone agrees with me, I think the same thing Hugo
Hugo said on 27/Aug/07
Based on seeing the UK premiere OOTP photo's of Felton, I'd say he looks 5'7", 5'8" in shoe. I don't think he is 5'9".
Based on seeing the UK premiere OOTP photo's of Felton, I'd say he looks 5'7", 5'8" in shoe. I don't think he is 5'9".
anna said on 20/Aug/07
oh and yeah, you made a good point about Devon. He seems to be 5'3" and not going anywhere, so dan should not be too threatened.
oh and yeah, you made a good point about Devon. He seems to be 5'3" and not going anywhere, so dan should not be too threatened.
anna said on 20/Aug/07
haha, yeah, it was a bit funny, he was just randomly dressed in a suit, but still, he absolutely towered over Dan. Dan was in Converse and Tom probably in dress shoes, but Tom probably had a 1/2" to 1" footwear advantage at most. I still think Tom is at least 5'9.5" or 5'10" though. And, what I also found interesting about the train scene, was that Emma, as she does in reliable photos, looked a good inch taller than Dan and she was actually standing up straight. She looked at least 5'6.5" in that scene and was wearing converse-esque shoes.
haha, yeah, it was a bit funny, he was just randomly dressed in a suit, but still, he absolutely towered over Dan. Dan was in Converse and Tom probably in dress shoes, but Tom probably had a 1/2" to 1" footwear advantage at most. I still think Tom is at least 5'9.5" or 5'10" though. And, what I also found interesting about the train scene, was that Emma, as she does in reliable photos, looked a good inch taller than Dan and she was actually standing up straight. She looked at least 5'6.5" in that scene and was wearing converse-esque shoes.
max said on 18/Aug/07
neville's taller than draco, and neville is 5'10.
neville's taller than draco, and neville is 5'10.
Chip said on 14/Aug/07
Anna, I'm not being a know-it-all, here, but you forgot Devon. Devon is 5'3", and is the shortest of the HP males (at least out of the characters who aren't just random extras, but actual characters, like Dean, Crabbe,, etc.). He's shorter than Dan, too. I agree with you about the train scene, btw. The one thing is that Tom might have been wearing dress shoes.
I never really, thought about it before, but it seems that nobody was in dress robes when they got off of the Hogwarts express in OOTP. It's not a big deal, but it's just funny, in a way. At least, the fact that Malfoy was "dressed-up" was.
Anna, I'm not being a know-it-all, here, but you forgot Devon. Devon is 5'3", and is the shortest of the HP males (at least out of the characters who aren't just random extras, but actual characters, like Dean, Crabbe,, etc.). He's shorter than Dan, too. I agree with you about the train scene, btw. The one thing is that Tom might have been wearing dress shoes.
I never really, thought about it before, but it seems that nobody was in dress robes when they got off of the Hogwarts express in OOTP. It's not a big deal, but it's just funny, in a way. At least, the fact that Malfoy was "dressed-up" was.
Anna said on 6/Aug/07
Well, I wouldn't tend to agree with you 'max'. The only Potter kids that aren't very tall are Dan and Rupert. Dan, at around 5'6", is obviously short for a guy and Rupert seems to be around 5'9", which is about average height I believe. All of the other guys are either average or tall and all of the girls, with the exception of Evanna Lynch, are average or above average as well. I still think Tom is 5'10" by now, he looks easily 4 to 5 inches taller than Dan. Train scene in OotP?
Well, I wouldn't tend to agree with you 'max'. The only Potter kids that aren't very tall are Dan and Rupert. Dan, at around 5'6", is obviously short for a guy and Rupert seems to be around 5'9", which is about average height I believe. All of the other guys are either average or tall and all of the girls, with the exception of Evanna Lynch, are average or above average as well. I still think Tom is 5'10" by now, he looks easily 4 to 5 inches taller than Dan. Train scene in OotP?
CT said on 4/Aug/07
He looks like he is slouching in that photo. His shoulders are the same height as Neville's, but his head is bent forward.
Also, I have seen many interviews where Dan Radcliffe says he is 5'6" and I cannot believe that Tom is only 3 inches taller than Dan, it's gotta be at least 5 inches.
He looks like he is slouching in that photo. His shoulders are the same height as Neville's, but his head is bent forward.
Also, I have seen many interviews where Dan Radcliffe says he is 5'6" and I cannot believe that Tom is only 3 inches taller than Dan, it's gotta be at least 5 inches.
max said on 31/Jul/07
tom is 5'9. he looks taller bec many potter kids around him are not very tall.
tom is 5'9. he looks taller bec many potter kids around him are not very tall.
Anna said on 24/Jul/07
I too agree that both Emma and Tom are taller than their given heights, but I don't think that's a good photo to judge by 'bebe-one'. 5'9.5", more likely 5'10", at the least for Tom. Are there any photos of Tom and Emma and/or Dan and Tom at some of the latest premieres?
I too agree that both Emma and Tom are taller than their given heights, but I don't think that's a good photo to judge by 'bebe-one'. 5'9.5", more likely 5'10", at the least for Tom. Are there any photos of Tom and Emma and/or Dan and Tom at some of the latest premieres?
bebe-one said on 22/Jul/07
Click Here
i dunno guys, emma watson is a minimum 5'5, but personally i think shes taller, and that looks like a pretty big height difference. not 6'1 for sure, but he's definately taller than 5'9 i mean c'mon now.
Click Here
i dunno guys, emma watson is a minimum 5'5, but personally i think shes taller, and that looks like a pretty big height difference. not 6'1 for sure, but he's definately taller than 5'9 i mean c'mon now.
6'3'' JK said on 20/Jul/07
I saw a picture of jamie with Joshua herdman (Goyle) who is a legit 6'1'' and Tom Felton, Jamie dwarfed both of them, so Jamie is 6'3'' Joshua is 6'1'' and Tom is 5'9''. Look how much Jamie has on Tom Even with Huge slouch which makes him lose 3 - 4 inches Click Here
I saw a picture of jamie with Joshua herdman (Goyle) who is a legit 6'1'' and Tom Felton, Jamie dwarfed both of them, so Jamie is 6'3'' Joshua is 6'1'' and Tom is 5'9''. Look how much Jamie has on Tom Even with Huge slouch which makes him lose 3 - 4 inches Click Here
cool army fad said on 20/Jul/07
Here's a recent picture of him beside Seamus and Crabbe so it is hard for me to believe that he is only 5'9":
Click Here
Here's a recent picture of him beside Seamus and Crabbe so it is hard for me to believe that he is only 5'9":
Click Here
John said on 19/Jul/07
Looks 5'11 in the new movie.
Looks 5'11 in the new movie.
Chip said on 19/Jul/07
Tom Felton IS 5'10." He is no less than 5'9". He looks MUCH taller than Dan in OOTP, btw.
Tom Felton IS 5'10." He is no less than 5'9". He looks MUCH taller than Dan in OOTP, btw.
NO WAY said on 15/Jul/07
HE IS NOT 6'0" or over. He isn't even 5'9"! I would liuke more than anyone for him to be that tall but he's not. There have been recent shots of him with Emma watson at the red carpet event for the new harry potter movie. 5'9" at the MOST!
HE IS NOT 6'0" or over. He isn't even 5'9"! I would liuke more than anyone for him to be that tall but he's not. There have been recent shots of him with Emma watson at the red carpet event for the new harry potter movie. 5'9" at the MOST!
6'3'' JK said on 10/Jul/07
NO WAY MAN, No way he is 5'10''!!! we seen enough proof so don't start this all over again, Rob is being generous by giving him even 5'9''
NO WAY MAN, No way he is 5'10''!!! we seen enough proof so don't start this all over again, Rob is being generous by giving him even 5'9''
Anna said on 9/Jul/07
I think he could be more like 5'10" to 5'11" now, not 6' though, maybe, but we'll have to see, we should be able to in the movie!!
I think he could be more like 5'10" to 5'11" now, not 6' though, maybe, but we'll have to see, we should be able to in the movie!!
dreamer said on 8/Jul/07
I think he at least is a good 180cm guy, for now. Cos he looks really tall in the film.. OR is it cos of the poses and film lightings? Hmmm... He should be 180cm by now.. Considering that he is already quite tall last year.
I think he at least is a good 180cm guy, for now. Cos he looks really tall in the film.. OR is it cos of the poses and film lightings? Hmmm... He should be 180cm by now.. Considering that he is already quite tall last year.
umad80 said on 2/Jul/07
I have to agree with Kelsey. I don't know about 6', but he looks taller than the 5'9" now. Because one of the new promo shots, even though he's in front, he doesn't look that much shorter than the almost 6'3" Jamie Waylett. I think Tom could be bordering on 6' now. Just hard to say...
I have to agree with Kelsey. I don't know about 6', but he looks taller than the 5'9" now. Because one of the new promo shots, even though he's in front, he doesn't look that much shorter than the almost 6'3" Jamie Waylett. I think Tom could be bordering on 6' now. Just hard to say...
kelsey said on 29/Jun/07
i saw order of the phoenix at the pre-screening last night and he is tall. hes about six feet. maybe a little more or a little less. but hes not short.
i saw order of the phoenix at the pre-screening last night and he is tall. hes about six feet. maybe a little more or a little less. but hes not short.
6'3'' JK said on 25/Jun/07
Tom is nothing more than 5'9'', it has been proven time after time again! what other proof you want??!!
Tom is nothing more than 5'9'', it has been proven time after time again! what other proof you want??!!
Chip said on 25/Jun/07
It looked like Tom was taller than Jason Isaacs in GoF. Tom is about 5'10", no less in my opinion. He grew loads taller during the filming of CoS. You can see it in some scenes, like in the Flourish and Blotts scene. His voice is heavier and he's looking down at Dan, while in other shots, he is shorter with a higher-pitched voice.
It looked like Tom was taller than Jason Isaacs in GoF. Tom is about 5'10", no less in my opinion. He grew loads taller during the filming of CoS. You can see it in some scenes, like in the Flourish and Blotts scene. His voice is heavier and he's looking down at Dan, while in other shots, he is shorter with a higher-pitched voice.
bebe-one said on 23/Jun/07
that is the biggest load i've ever heard. no way in hell is tom felton OR rupert grint that short. please, gimme a break. sean biggerstaff (oliver wood) is 5'9" flat, and theres a pic from way back when in 2002...of sean and tom standing next to eachother in a group photo at the CHAMBER OF SECRETS dvd launch, which would make tom about 14 (?) he was practically stooping next to biggerstaf...an that was like 5 years ago...so no way he is as short as you've put him at. i will hunt down that pic and post it to prove it.
that is the biggest load i've ever heard. no way in hell is tom felton OR rupert grint that short. please, gimme a break. sean biggerstaff (oliver wood) is 5'9" flat, and theres a pic from way back when in 2002...of sean and tom standing next to eachother in a group photo at the CHAMBER OF SECRETS dvd launch, which would make tom about 14 (?) he was practically stooping next to biggerstaf...an that was like 5 years ago...so no way he is as short as you've put him at. i will hunt down that pic and post it to prove it.
6'3'' JK said on 19/Apr/07
No way man! Tom Felton is just a 5'9'' and nothing over it
No way man! Tom Felton is just a 5'9'' and nothing over it
CT said on 19/Apr/07
I think he is taller than 5'9" because he looked much taller than Dan (way more than just 2.5 inches). Emma is 5'7 and he looks at least 4 inches taller than her, so I would agree with Chip on this one (5'11").
I think he is taller than 5'9" because he looked much taller than Dan (way more than just 2.5 inches). Emma is 5'7 and he looks at least 4 inches taller than her, so I would agree with Chip on this one (5'11").
6'2.5'' JK said on 2/Apr/07
No Way Tom as 5'11'', he is 5'9'' and thats even pushing it
No Way Tom as 5'11'', he is 5'9'' and thats even pushing it
Chip said on 1/Apr/07
I'd say that Tom is about 5'11" at the max, 5'9" at the least. He looked WAY taller than Dan in GoF. Tom is definitely not 6'1", since Jamie Waylett is about 6'3", and he practically towers over Tom.
I'd say that Tom is about 5'11" at the max, 5'9" at the least. He looked WAY taller than Dan in GoF. Tom is definitely not 6'1", since Jamie Waylett is about 6'3", and he practically towers over Tom.
Dana said on 1/Apr/07
i dont care... he's hot... draco's hot... but personally i dont think he's 6 feet, 5'9" is so much more feasible
i dont care... he's hot... draco's hot... but personally i dont think he's 6 feet, 5'9" is so much more feasible
6'2.5'' JK said on 29/Mar/07
He is 5'9'' Max! and No way near 6'1''!!! Rupert is 5'6'' and Daniel is probably 5'5.5'' At his Max in shoes
He is 5'9'' Max! and No way near 6'1''!!! Rupert is 5'6'' and Daniel is probably 5'5.5'' At his Max in shoes
antron said on 28/Mar/07
heather are you for real? I hope you are joking. He said he was 5'9," why would he say he was 4 inches shorter than he was? I'll give him 5'10" max, definitely a lot taller than Dan, but he does not look like a 6 footer in any of the movies. Maybe you can change my mind if he's grown more and stands taller in OOTP.
heather are you for real? I hope you are joking. He said he was 5'9," why would he say he was 4 inches shorter than he was? I'll give him 5'10" max, definitely a lot taller than Dan, but he does not look like a 6 footer in any of the movies. Maybe you can change my mind if he's grown more and stands taller in OOTP.
heather said on 19/Mar/07
i believe he is 6"1 if it says he is 6"1 if you don't believe it then you are not a true tom felton fan. i love tom felton so im going to believe that it's his height
i believe he is 6"1 if it says he is 6"1 if you don't believe it then you are not a true tom felton fan. i love tom felton so im going to believe that it's his height
Global said on 23/Feb/07
Tom taller radcliffe 14cm 5.5Inches
Daniel: 164cm
Tom: 178cm
Tom is 5'10"
Tom taller radcliffe 14cm 5.5Inches
Daniel: 164cm
Tom: 178cm
Tom is 5'10"
6'2.5'' JK said on 17/Feb/07
He maybe just about 5'9'', he is really thin so he gives alot of people the impression of a tall guy when he is really average, Rob, what was the highest you had him listed on this site?
Editor Rob
He maybe just about 5'9'', he is really thin so he gives alot of people the impression of a tall guy when he is really average, Rob, what was the highest you had him listed on this site?
Editor Rob I can't remember exactly, 5ft 11 I think initially and chopped down after changing potter heights
murko said on 16/Feb/07
yeah this seems to be off, no way he is 6'1" 5-10, or 11 is more like it, he just looks tall because most of the author harry potter actors are quite short
yeah this seems to be off, no way he is 6'1" 5-10, or 11 is more like it, he just looks tall because most of the author harry potter actors are quite short
Anonymous said on 2/Feb/07
Rob - You don't think he's grown at all since 2005? Surely he must be 5'10" by now...
Rob - You don't think he's grown at all since 2005? Surely he must be 5'10" by now...
Anonymous said on 15/Jan/07
well it's possible that he's 6'1 now considering he could have had a growth spurt or something. it's possible.
well it's possible that he's 6'1 now considering he could have had a growth spurt or something. it's possible.
6'2'' JK said on 21/Dec/06
Rob, since when did you downgrade him to 5'9'' and Why?, anyways i think 5'9'' is closer to the truth for him
Editor Rob
Rob, since when did you downgrade him to 5'9'' and Why?, anyways i think 5'9'' is closer to the truth for him
Editor Rob 28 days, 6 hours, 42 mi...
johnny link said on 22/Oct/06
nikki: he really is much taller than dan in the movies, you can really see it in GoF. I am guessing that Tom is 5'10" or 5'11" and Dan is 5'4"/5'5". Dan does not seem to be growing anymore, however, in the new OoTP pictures everyone seems to either be catching up to him or growing even taller than him.
nikki: he really is much taller than dan in the movies, you can really see it in GoF. I am guessing that Tom is 5'10" or 5'11" and Dan is 5'4"/5'5". Dan does not seem to be growing anymore, however, in the new OoTP pictures everyone seems to either be catching up to him or growing even taller than him.
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.