Beastman says on 23/Jan/12
That's possible, but I think they used his peak height at that point even though he may not have still been that. I mean, if he started to shrink at around 60 or so, it's not like he would've lost half an inch in 18 years and then an extra 1.5 or 2.5 inches in only 6 years. Plus, if he was a full 6'5, that would've made him the tallest lead actor alone, since Vince Vaughn didn't reach the full thing. But now, Vince should FINALLY be downgraded to his definite 6'4.5. Not a chance would he have lost anything before the time he was recorded, and even now.

EdgarHernandez says on 20/Jan/12
he still was taller than his friend vincent price(who wasnt shorter than 6ft 4), the 6ft 4.5 was the measurement the guiness put when he was already old, the book listen him at that height in the 2000, now he was 78 at the time, i think is pretty posible that he lost half inch by that time.

Wowzers says on 19/Jan/12
Actor Christopher Lee (UK) has portrayed both characters, starring in The Curse of Frankenstein in 1957 and Dracula in 1958. Standing 1.94 m (6 ft 5 in) tall, Lee is a co-record holder for the tallest actor in a leading role, sharing the title with Vince Vaughn (USA).

So he says 6ft 4in, and he's 6ft 4.5in, so he rounds down where most round up.

Henrik says on 18/Jan/12
Easily gave off a 6'5" impression in The Man with the Golden Gun.

Beastman says on 13/Jan/12
Geez. How hard is it to find this page or another and realize evidence is written down? Not hard at all. It doesn't matter what he looks or what he says, it's right here. It's an official statement holding an official measurement. It's not an estimate or anything else. Can't evidence just be taken when it's offered? He was 194 cm which Rob should present as 6ft 4.5 since that's what it really is. 6ft 5 was a roundup to look more impressive and appropriate. And the exact same thing goes with Vince Vaughn. (Below the Dracula pic)
Click Here

EdgarHernandez says on 7/Nov/11
the age has finally caught christopher lee...HARD, he is in the pat o become the new clint eastwood case, he already have the disproportionate shirinked uper body to match:
Click Here
but to be fair, he is 9 years older than clint, and probably now walking he is 6f 2, and standing for a photo he is 6ft 3 straight(unlike clint lee still can straight his back)
a thing to take in acount is that christopher lee have a very dignifed posture, he stands if he can complety straight, this photo was from 2005, just look how straight he hold his back:
Click Here
this one with christina locke(easily looks solid 6ft 4)
Click Here
the 2 are standing in perfect posture(christine is even forcing a little)
with johnny depp, who acording to the site is 5ft 9, looks solid 6ft 4:
Click Here
that photo was from 2006, this guy was 6ft 4 still at the time but when the cane entered he began losing height, he begean using a cane in the very end of octover of 2006, and he has been with a can since then, but come on, he was 85, if i come to 85 without needing a cane i will scount myself a extremely lucky.
so my theory is that until 2007 he was solid 6ft 4, bu i think that he drop from solid 6ft 5 to 6ft 4 in the very mid 90s.
christopher lee and roger moore have been compared before, i think is safe to say that in this phot is show how much bigger lee realy is:
Click Here
roger moore, with heels togheter, squared shoulders and the head just slight tild, christopher lee in other side is standing relaxed.

Tman says on 4/Nov/11
Peak 1,95m which he rounded down to 6'4

LAN Jiao says on 30/Oct/11
Peak 194, now 189.

EdgarHernandez says on 30/Sep/11
gaga, my friend, 7 cm is very short lost height for a guy as far i am concern, i mean, do you ever see the case of david prowse, clint eastwood, or boris karloff?, on top of that this guys is not anymore in the nearly 80 line, he is nearly 90 years old(the broder of my dad suffer greatter height lost than lee, lee is pretty much very lucky).

Gaga-183.2cm-185.1cm says on 20/Sep/11
Well, rob, i dont think he ever was 6'5, for record guinness in the official page they list him at 194cm alongside with vince vaughn at also 194cm. If you saw him at 189, isnt it more likely he was 6'4 than 6'5?6-7cm loss is too much even for an old person with a good posture like him, my granda is almost 80 and with his same posture and has lost just an inch and a half of height.

Rick springfield says on 12/Aug/11
Strong 6 5 in 1973 movie wicker man

Shaun says on 30/Jul/11
@ James. No, that's not what I said. I said Rob said he estimated him as 6'2" or 6'3" in 2006. Could be 6'2" today. ALTHOUGH I saw pics of him from around 2009 and he still looked very tall range as in looked 6'4" ish even compared to several actors around 6' or 6'1".

George H. says on 20/Jul/11
I've said it a million times in real life and on this site. Not everybody loses height with age. We've personally known two who didn't even lose half an inch well into their eighties and nineties.

James says on 19/Jul/11
Shaun says on 18/Jul/11
Well he's pushing 90 now, you'd expect a 6'5" peak guy to be nearer 6'2" by 90 right? Isn't it true men lose about an inch of height per decade after 60 on average? Rob said he estimated him as 6'2" or 6'3" in 2006. Could be 6'2" today. Although I saw pics of him from around 2009 and he still looked very tall range.

6'2.5 is not really in the very tall range.

Shaun says on 18/Jul/11
Well he's pushing 90 now, you'd expect a 6'5" peak guy to be nearer 6'2" by 90 right? Isn't it true men lose about an inch of height per decade after 60 on average? Rob said he estimated him as 6'2" or 6'3" in 2006. Could be 6'2" today. Although I saw pics of him from around 2009 and he still looked very tall range.

Shaun says on 18/Jul/11
Alan Napier looked 3-4 inches taller than John Wayne did!! I watched Man with the Golden Gun the other say and think he would have measured around 195cm next to 187cm Roger Moore at that time. The height difference to me looked roughly 3.5 inches.

James says on 15/Jul/11
i don't think he was ever over 6'5.

Mohammed says on 28/Jun/11
He was a solid 6'5 or even taller during his youth. I Doubt he's more than 6'1-6'1.5 now considering his age.

Danimal says on 14/Jun/11
Shaun says on 14/May/11
Guiness Book of Records lists Lee at 6'5". Obviously they have proof he was measured at 6 ft 5 at some point, they don't dish out records without proof. Lee always claimed a flat 6'4" which is one of the more obvious under billings. Alan Napier claimed 6'4" too LOL.

Tim Robbins underbilled himself as well.

Danimal says on 14/Jun/11
The man was a full 6'5". At almost 90 years old, he's probably dipped below 6'2" today.

Terryman says on 12/Jun/11
Rob it actually possible he was rounding down 1,95m when he said 6'4'',the Guiness book of records lists him and Vaughn at this height too so i think he might have a case I mean you usually list celebs as they claim and I think you should give him the figure he was rounding down!

James says on 3/Jun/11
Shaun says on 14/May/11
Guiness Book of Records lists Lee at 6'5". Obviously they have proof he was measured at 6 ft 5 at some point, they don't dish out records without proof. Lee always claimed a flat 6'4" which is one of the more obvious under billings. Alan Napier claimed 6'4" too LOL.

guiness had vince vaughn at 6'4 (193cm)

avi says on 27/May/11
EdgarHernandez says on 25/May/11
avi you have take in consideration that lee, and monroe are in a beach?, you sunk alot, more if you are heavier.
this clip i related to the tim burton photo, just pause in the minute 5:39 , when clin straight up more, he still tries to stay straight but his legs arent strong enought to carry his body anymore.
Click Here
i see solid 4 inches, and lee is not traying to stay straight, he is even leadint to give burton a hugh.

yes it is evident his height has really taken a toll on him. he is probably a strong 6'2 now a days. he looks to be sinking 2 inches so yes a strong 6'4 when younger. which makes sense because he has 3 1/2 inches on Moore. about the sand i have seen the movie countless times and doubt it makes a difference here. its not like Lee is standing in a 2 inch dune or something. there are other instance where moore and lee and together and it is evident that the difference is the same as it was in the sand picture.

EdgarHernandez says on 25/May/11
avi you have take in consideration that lee, and monroe are in a beach?, you sunk alot, more if you are heavier.
this clip i related to the tim burton photo, just pause in the minute 5:39 , when clin straight up more, he still tries to stay straight but his legs arent strong enought to carry his body anymore.
Click Here
i see solid 4 inches, and lee is not traying to stay straight, he is even leadint to give burton a hugh.

avi says on 19/May/11
this should end any debate. Christopher Lee was 6'4 NOT 6'5. Roger Moore is a strong 6'1. here is the pic:Click Here
come one there is not more than a 3 -3.5 TOPS inch difference. NOT 4 inches. if it was 4 Moore would be on par with lee's eye brows. remember Moore could be 6'0.5. it is not certain Moore was saying his 6'1-6'1.5 height barefoot.

Cranberries (6 ft. 3.25 evening, 17 years) says on 17/May/11
Click Here
Certainly not looking 6'3" next to ~5'11.5" Tim Burton (Burton might be shorter than that). I'd say he's much nearer to 6'1.5" or so.

Shaun says on 14/May/11
Click Here

Looks about 9-10 inches taller than 5'6" George Lucas here at age 80 odd.

Shaun says on 14/May/11
Guiness Book of Records lists Lee at 6'5". Obviously they have proof he was measured at 6 ft 5 at some point, they don't dish out records without proof. Lee always claimed a flat 6'4" which is one of the more obvious under billings. Alan Napier claimed 6'4" too LOL.

Shaun says on 14/May/11
Johan Cruyff says on 30/Apr/11
Christopher Lee's real heights were:

---PEAK---
Morning (ou of bed)= 6'4.65" (1.95 m)
After 1,5-3 hrs= 6'4.2" (1.94 m)
After 5-10 hrs= 6'3'9" (1.93 m)

Today, he's a stronger 6'2"-6'2.25" (1.88-1.89 m) max, no more!

No way. The lowest he could have possibly been in his prime was 6'4.5". out of bed this guy would have been a strong 6'5". He's lost 2-2.5 inches today approaching 90 which is a very normal height loss. Looks between 6'2" and 6'3" today.

Shaun says on 14/May/11
Clint had much more muscle than Lee, although Clint did also give off a rake thin lanky impression... Lee looked like he'd be 6'5" 185 pounds sort of frame.

James says on 13/May/11
Both a peak clint and peak christopher lee seemed similar in build except i think clint eastwood might have been more bulky

EdgarHernandez says on 9/May/11
well james, i always take in acount that both of the mans(monroe and lee) are in a bad surface(they are in a beach) so the heavier must sunk more(maybe lee weight a little more considering his height but dont show because of his height), have you ever walk in a beach, you sunk alot there, most of the time you end between 2 to 3 inches whit feets in the sand.
as for sam:
Click Here
in this one and in the 12 they stand each other(vincent and lee are by far the largest people in the movie) but i notice that vincent all the movie is oviusly sluching a little, maybe some one want to make lee look bigger.

James says on 7/May/11
Well i saw him in james bond again today and he looked closer to 6'4 than 6'5. think about a legit 6'5 guy who is rake think should give of a 6'7 or 6'6 illusion. then again i notice this guy has quite a long narrow head like clint eastwood did so maybe that is why he does not look taller?

Sam says on 4/May/11
In this photo Lee looks much taller than Vincent Price. It looks like the 12 year ago difference between them resulted in a larger height difference than 1 inch:
Click Here

EdgarHernandez says on 3/May/11
johan: this guy was taller than a legit 6ft 4 vincent price, even vincet express that lee was taller than him. vincent height can be seen in one movie whit clint walker were him is not dwarf by the gigantic 6ft 6 of his co star(maybe helps that vincent was nearly all legs)

Johan Cruyff says on 30/Apr/11
Christopher Lee's real heights were:

---PEAK---
Morning (ou of bed)= 6'4.65" (1.95 m)
After 1,5-3 hrs= 6'4.2" (1.94 m)
After 5-10 hrs= 6'3'9" (1.93 m)

Today, he's a stronger 6'2"-6'2.25" (1.88-1.89 m) max, no more!

EdgarHernandez says on 29/Apr/11
christopher lee have a very stiff posture still. he unched like my grandfather, he dont hunh his back but his legs not longer suport his weight so he walks whit his legs and hip relaxed alot, that make him lots alot of height, just look him stading, his knees are always bend and tired. his back is not the problem is his legs.

mohammad says on 4/Apr/11
He's 88 years old, of course he lost a lot of height, also he has a pretty bad posture nowadays.

I would say that he was 6'5 in his prime and 6'2 by looking at contemporary pictures.

DeEs 5-11 and 3/4 says on 19/Mar/11
6'4. About 3 1/2 inches max on 6'1 Roger Moore. Yes people can lose 3 inches but only with a hunched back or some other medical issue. The height is technically still there.In fact theres an article with men that lose more than an inch of height are more likely to suffer from heart disease.

Josh B says on 14/Mar/11
Click Here
This shows the height difference of him with Moore

Danimal says on 10/Mar/11
Anonymous says on 30/Nov/10
Mistor Lennon, I'm afraid I'm not buying that.
Chris Lee 6'4
Vincent Price 6'3
Peter Cushing 5'8

hahaha.... Cushing was 5'11.5".. Lee was 6'5" and Price was 6'4...

Danimal says on 10/Mar/11
avi says on 9/Mar/11
If he is 6'2 now he was never a real 6'5. come on. 6'4. losing more than 2 inches in height doesnt happen unless you have back surgery or some other trauma to the spine or legs. My grandfather is 5'7.5ish. He was never over 5'8 1/4 when he was younger. Yes tall people lose more height but 3 inches is tremendous.

MEdical science disagrees with you. The AVERAGE man by 80 will have lost 2" and the average female by 80 will have lost 3.25".. After 80 years of age, the increase in height loss gets larger faster... Remember, this is the AVERAGE.. Some men lose even MORE...

little sue says on 10/Mar/11
Both my Nan and her sister were around 5ft 2 in youth but had both lost about 6 or 7 inches by the time they died at 93. Osteoporphosis was probably the cause though they were never diagnosed it

avi says on 9/Mar/11
If he is 6'2 now he was never a real 6'5. come on. 6'4. losing more than 2 inches in height doesnt happen unless you have back surgery or some other trauma to the spine or legs. My grandfather is 5'7.5ish. He was never over 5'8 1/4 when he was younger. Yes tall people lose more height but 3 inches is tremendous.

Jack Hastings says on 13/Feb/11
Tim Burton described him as 6'5" @ The Baftas when presenting him with the Fellowship award. Lee looked a strong 6'2" but definitely was 6'5" at prime, no question.

EdgarHernandez says on 6/Feb/11
mike, legit 6ft 5 in his prime is posible(more like nearly a fact), bu this mean most know him know for his star wars and lord of the rings stuff, so most people know his at his 6ft 4 range.

Mike says on 5/Feb/11
He looks strongly only 6 ft 4 I don't think 6 ft 5 is a ligeit height it's too tall for him

EdgarHernandez says on 23/Dec/10
meltdown, yes he is old, but even in his nearly 90s, this guy is easily well above 6ft. he looks even today in videos and photos between 6ft 4 and 6ft 3.5

Mon says on 15/Dec/10
6'4'' 1/2 according to what he said himself in a Brit tv show about his life.

EdgarHernandez says on 9/Dec/10
i agree whit lennon, there is photos and videos of cushing and lee, and always the diference is between 6 to 5 inches in diference.
is complety laugable 5ft 8 claim

Mister_Lennon says on 2/Dec/10
I really think that Price was 6'4 and Lee 6'5 or close. Cushing was also 5'11. Only compare his height with his co-stars. For example, Oliver Reed was about 5'10 or 5'11, and Cushing was about the same height or a little bit taller.

Anonymous says on 30/Nov/10
Mistor Lennon, I'm afraid I'm not buying that.
Chris Lee 6'4
Vincent Price 6'3
Peter Cushing 5'8

k mart says on 26/Nov/10
i understand why he claimed 6'4'' instead of 6'5''.. this is because as he stated in 1999 the year sleepy hollow was made he confirmed he lost an inch of height of his peak 6'5'' and is now 6'4''.

James says on 23/Nov/10
Edgar rob saw him at a weak 6'3 though 4 years ago.

Edgar Hernandez says on 11/Nov/10
by love of good, if he lost that height it will be very, very noticiable, james, he is old(nearly 90) but good lord i envy his posture this guy walks very tall and solid

James says on 10/Nov/10
6'2.25 (189cm) today.

mrknowitall says on 3/Nov/10
i saw him and i'm 6'2" and 13, he looked about 6'3-6'4"

EdgarHernandez says on 27/Oct/10
thanks james

James says on 25/Oct/10
Edgar sorry what i meant to say was Roger Moore was in the 6'1 range.