How tall was Christopher Lee

Christopher Lee's Height

6ft 4.5in (194 cm)

British actor best remembered for roles in films such as The Curse of Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Oblong Box, The Devil Rides Out, The Wicker Man, The Man with the Golden Gun, The Three Musketeers and film franchise such as the Dracula movies by Hammer Studios, The Lord of the Rings, and the Star Wars prequels. In his early entries in the Spotlight Casting directory he was listed as standing 6ft 3. He once told Cinescape magazine - on filming Sleepy Hollow - "They're not going to have me in the same scene standing up. I'm 6'4!, and they are 5' 6' or something like that; they're just not going to have it. I don't blame them". In his book Tall, Dark and Gruesome he says "Dr No at 6ft 6 tops me by a couple of inches." I saw him up close in October 2006 and thought he looked between 6ft 2 and 3.
By the time I was 17 years old I was 6ft 4.

You May Be Interested

Height of Peter Cushing
Peter Cushing
5ft 11.5in (182 cm)
Height of Ian McKellen
Ian McKellen
5ft 10.5in (179 cm)
Height of Vincent Price
Vincent Price
6ft 4in (193 cm)
Height of Ian McDiarmid
Ian McDiarmid
5ft 8.5in (174 cm)

Add a Comment 250 comments

Average Guess (54 Votes)
6ft 4.68in (194.8cm)
Bugsy said on 26/Jul/17
Lee was WAY taller than Roger Moore in The Man With The Golden Gun. Not less than four full inches, he was looking straight over his head. For some odd reason in The Wicker Man, I didn't notice Lee standing out as particularly tall. It's been a while since I've seen it though.

Anyway, so this seems about right to me. I always thought Moore was max 6'0.5 so this makes sense.
Jordan87 said on 16/Jul/17
Sir Lee is read was 190-195 pounds most of his life. He was tall man but his lean frame made him appear even taller.

His fight with yoda in ep. 2 required a stunt double but the idea of a man over 6'4" fighting a green alien of 3 feet tall could only happen in a Star Wars movie. Lee was also taller than his stunt double by an inch or two in the behind the scenes.

Even in his late 70ms this guy was tall.
Mark(5'9.5 said on 14/Jul/17
Ahh. Basically Rob, I can still make an argument for 6'4.75"? I wouldn't go lower than 6'4.5" really.
Editor Rob: yes, but a full 6ft 5 I wouldn't be as confident of.
Mark(5'9.5 said on 13/Jul/17
Out of curiosity Rob, because you did downgrade Roger Moore to 186 cm, would that rule out 6'4.75" for Lee or is 6'4.75" still an arguable figure for a peak Christopher Lee?
Editor Rob: I think anywhere from 6ft 4 to 5 zone was arguable for Lee. I think given Moore claiming first thing height, and basically looking 186 range, it is the best mark to give him. Lee I feel right between 6ft 4 and 5 is still what he generally could look from all I've seen through the years.
Mark(5'9.5") said on 11/Jul/17
He's likely the only person back then (along with John Cleese) who would stand out that tallest.

I still will make a case for Lee at 195 cm.
Ian C said on 29/Jun/17
Lee claimed six foot four, but he was probably taller. He just didn't realize it.

True story: I am now 65, and I measured myself a few weeks ago to see if I'd lost any height. I had been measured at six foot four by a nurse for a physical exam when I was eighteen, and I had always assumed that that was my adult height. But when I measured myself last month, I was amazed to find that I was six foot five. Probably I had grown for at least a year after my height had been measured by the nurse. This was, as I say, quite a surprise, but it explained a few things. Like, why so many people marvel at my height when they first meet me. Or why I'd meet people who claimed to be six foot four, and was taller than they were. Or how I was able to eat so much food when I was nineteen without getting fat.
Canson said on 13/Jun/17
@Mark: he may very well be and him listed the way rob has him could even signal that. I'm actually between 6'4.25-.5 so he may be the full 6'4.5 at his lowest or be 195cm. I sure don't think he was less than a strong 6'4. But in rob's case he has Joe mangianello 6'4.75 too he looks a bit less more like 194cm compared to other guys so he and lee could be 6'4.5 and dead even
Mark(5'9.25") said on 7/Jun/17
@Canson I don't want to say this, but Christopher Lee seems like a guy taller than you. Rob mentioned that Peak Christopher Lee and Kobe Bryant would measure close.
Canson said on 6/Jun/17
He claimed 6'4 I'd say no less than 193 no higher than Rob's listing for him.Bobby3342's signature quote " People aren't aware of how tall that height actually is" when you have someone like Conan claiming 6'4 and is close to an inch shorter
Sam said on 5/Jun/17
I agree with a lot of folks here, I wouldn't really go under 6'4.75" for his peak height.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Jun/17
He looked 6ft3 range in the 2000's.
Jordan87 said on 28/May/17
He said he was 6'4" bc he was actually weary of his height since he admitted he lost roles bc of it. He was closer to 6'5" then 6'4". He made Sir Roger Moore ( rip) look like a man of average height when he in fact was over 6'0" himself.

Lee maybe have been closer to 6'4.25 at night , but a strong 6'4.5 during the day I'm betting , possibly higher.
Mark(5'9.25") said on 27/May/17
6'4" flat? Lee has always been 6'4.75" or much nearer 6'5".
Sonnecker said on 25/May/17
I'd give to a young Sir Christopher 195 cm of height, 6'4.75".
At 90, although the stick helping him to walk, he still looked at 190 or similar...
Willes188 said on 24/May/17
6'4 flat is a joke for a young Christopher Lee. He was near 195cm.
Jin said on 22/May/17
6'4 (193 cm) at peak, as he always claimed to be
Mark(5'9.25") said on 20/May/17
@berta Rob did confirmed that Peak Christopher Lee would measure very close in height with Kobe Bryant. It's on Kobe Bryant's page.

We may as well go for 6'4.75".
Sandy Cowell said on 12/May/17
@ Jordan - Hi! I totally agree that Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing were incredible in front of the camera!. I liked what you had to say! đź‘Ť

@ Jordan and Mark - Hello to both of you! I'm not really a 'Batman' fan, but when I saw Heath Ledger playing 'the Joker', I was totally transfixed! He had it in him to become one of the all-time greats one day. It's such a tragedy that he passed so young. As with Lee and Cushing, he owned that screen!
Mark(5'9.25 said on 11/May/17
@Jordan87 I think Heath Ledger would have been one of the greats. After all, he deserved when he showed his performance as Joker.
Jordan87 said on 8/May/17

Sir Lee was certainly a Camera Dominating Guy, of course to do to height, other to do with Poise. Sir Peter Cushing was great too, that generation of Actors were really something. The Modern day guys, Daniel Day Lewis, Tom Hanks are great, but I tend to favor the Old School Guys.

Heath Ledger would have been one of the greats by now. Dude was 28 when he passed and had Birthed a great Villain in the Joker. Many Say he rivals Darth Vader as the "all time villain" but that's a Topic for a Different board.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 4/May/17

Not to mention Lee was taller than a Peak Samuel Jackson at 80 years old! That's really saying something! He's probably the best actor of all time save for a few others. I doubt anyone is going to give as much presence like Sir Lee.
berta said on 4/May/17
rob 195 would really be better never looked shorter than that at his peak.
30% 196
50% 195
20% 194
Jordan87 said on 3/May/17

Yes The Chances of This Man wearing lifts is 0. He lost out roles do to his height, thus lost money. He was a tall man. Classically tall. Great Actor as well.

Look at pics of Him at Age 80 with 6'0 MIN Hayden Christensen. He still was around 6'3- 1/2.80 Year olds typically loose around 1-1/2" so add that to his height in 2005 at age 80 and he was 6'5 easily.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 1/May/17
Of course, I would be infinity percent damned if James comments here and says that Sir Lee wore lifts.
Mark(5'9.25" said on 30/Apr/17
He deserves an upgrade to 6'4.75" or maybe 6'5". He's not under this listing by any means even 1/8th of an inch.
RichardSpain said on 4/Apr/17
He was a tall man, and excellent actor. I think he lost height 6 or 7 cm total.

Young: 196 cm peak
50-70 years old: maybe 194cm
before his death:187-189 cm
berta said on 31/Mar/17
Also if he was 190 cm in 2006 when he was about 85 years i think he had lose 2 inches at this listing he would have only lost 4cm at 85 thats less than arnold. I guess some guys really dont loose that mutha at 85 but my believe is that most people have lost about 5,5 cm at that age if they are in good shape. 3 cm if they are in incredibly shape and some people even loose 10 cm at that age if they have small bones and weak muscles
berta said on 31/Mar/17
Rob i really hhink he deserves a 195 listing ore even full 6 foot 5. He looked almost 10 cm taller than roger more 7 cm is to little. Also he was in the series " HOW THE WEST WAS WON" with james arness who is listed 201 cm and arness looked maybe 3,5 cm taller it was nowhere near 7 cm. Yes arness had very bad posture. But this guy at 195 and perfect posture could look just litte shorter than a 6 foot 7 guy
Slim said on 25/Mar/17
Rob, where are there average door ways in homes that are 6ft8-10"? Highest I've seen are 6'9".
Editor Rob: I'm not sure which countries have doors that size, but there are certainly more lavish homes around the UK with very big doorframes, taller than your typical 6ft 6 frame.
Jordan87 said on 10/Mar/17
Mark ( 5'9.25)

Yes Prowse was 29 years old when he lifted the Stones in 1964( 12 years before he Suited up as Vader). He was more successful as a Power Lifter than a Bodybuilder. He also was a natural athlete, no roids.

As Far as Lee, Yes I enjoyed him as Saruman, especially when he created his own Orc Army. Again, in LOTR Saruman was my favorite villain of the whole series do to Sir Lee's Performance and look. He had the perfect dark Sorcerer look to him. Very Evil looking Fellow indeed.
Mark(5'9.25") said on 9/Mar/17
@Jordan87 Dave prowse lifting 775 pound of all stone combined? That's terrifying!

Also, Lee has always gave the vibe of what evil can truly be in movies especially lord of the rings! Also, Lord of the Rings is my actual first movie i watched when I was with my parents at that time!
Mark(5'9.25") said on 9/Mar/17
@Jordan87 Dave prowse lifting 775 pound of all stone combined? That's terrifying!
Jordan87 said on 8/Mar/17
Mark ( 5'9.25

Lee could be intimidating on a separate kind of level than Prowse. Example him being tall and thin with his very dark eyes gave him a Lucifer type look.

Dave Prowse on the other hand, (of similar height) was 250 pounds of muscle and a former British strong man so they needed some mass to fill out the Vader Suit. ( A side note, Dave Prowse lifted the Dinnie stones which weigh 775 pounds combined!)

Sir Lee was also a gentleman but looked quite evil as Saruman in LOTR Trilogy. My favorite Villain of those movies. Again, he gave a Lucifer impression.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 4/Mar/17
Rob, how tall does lee look compared to this standard door? He actually looks like the full 195 cm in the picture or maybe slightly higher.

Click Here
Editor Rob: Mark, the doorway height is unknown, it could be 6ft 8-10 range, but since he's in front and the camera is lower, his height looks taller against the door.
Mark(5'9.25") said on 4/Mar/17
@Jordan87 @mister_lennon

Just imagine if Sir Lee wore the full Darth Vader helmet at his prime; god knows how imposing he would be in person wearing them!
mister_lennon said on 4/Mar/17
I think:
Prowse: 193-194
Mark(5'9.25") said on 2/Mar/17
@Jordan87 I'm not sure about lee being taller than prowse but I would like to believe he is taller! I think Prowse should be downgraded to 6'5.5" at peak. Lee deserves the 195 cm upgrade if not the full 6'5". We rarely see an 80 year old man at 6'3". He's taller than Vincent Price, Leon Greene, and isn't half way towered by listed 6'7" James Arness.
Jordan87 said on 1/Mar/17
Mark ( 5'9.25"),

I couldn't ever See Sir Lee wearing lifts, due to the fact that he lost roles due to his tall height already.

Dave Prowse is a different story. I do not think he wore Lifts, but he certainly exaggerated his height. The Way Prowe's career goes he got roles for being tall, so Of Course he would bump it up a bit. I still think Lee was actually taller than Prowse.

Lee 6'5"
Prowse 6'4"
Mark(5'9.25") said on 28/Feb/17
I'm also waiting for some one to say 'Lee wears lifts' because I would find that ridiculously difficult to believe!
Mark(5'9.25") said on 25/Feb/17
@Jordan87 a full 6'5" is possible for Lee. I still make a case for 195 cm for Lee. He's not under 6'4.5" by any means at his peak.
Jordan87 said on 23/Feb/17

Lee Maintained a good weight, perhaps if he had put on the pounds like a typical man it would have affected his posture more but he stayed thin.

Lee in Man with the Golden gun had Moore by a good deal of height when they were back to back.

Keep in Mind Roger Moore was about a inch under Connery who was 6'2". Say Moore is 6'1" ( Conservatively). Lee did have a Solid 4" On Moore. 6'5" Very Possible as Younger man.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 22/Feb/17
@Jordan87 I'm surprised he didn't shrink that much compared to most people. Another indicator of Lee being a solid 6'4.5" or even a 6'4.75" person is pictures and videos with him and Vincent Price. Lee appears to be at least an inch taller than Price.

Also, Lee towered 6'1.5" Roger Moore. Lee almost looks the same height as this standard door for the picture below.

Click Here
Jordan87 said on 21/Feb/17
Hayden Christenson is a solid 6'0" IMO and Lee had him be at least 3" in all of their Pics. Lee was 80 at the time. SO a guy that age loosed around 1.5". Lee could have easily been a 6'4.5 guy back in his day.

IN the below Pics ( Scroll Down) you will See Lee( Age 80) looking around 5" On the roughly 5'10" Jeremy Bulloch ( See his picture with Rob) putting him at around 6'3" as an 80 year old man. Must have been a good 6'4.5" Back in his day based on height loss alone.

Click Here
Mark(5'9.25 said on 15/Feb/17
194.5 cm is possible but that's the worst absolute case. 195 cm would a better listing. I'm starting to think Lee would be completely even with Kobe Bryant and Charles Barkley.
mister_lennon said on 14/Feb/17
Yeah, i think that he was 195 at peak.
Willes189 said on 14/Feb/17
I agree with 194.5-195cm for Lee, always thought that 6'4.75 is a better estimate
Mark(5'9.25") said on 11/Feb/17
I agree Berta. 195 cm would be a better shout for Lee. Though 194 cm is possible, that's the worst I give Lee.
berta said on 11/Feb/17
hm 194 for him means that roger more was not taller than 185. i can see him as 195 and 186 for roger more. was way more than 7 cm beetween them
Mark(5'9.25") said on 3/Feb/17
Physically standing alone, he pulls off a 6'5" and does physically look it in this picture.

Click Here

He towered a lot of people even in Lord of the Rings.
Mark(5'9.25") said on 3/Feb/17
I think 195 cm would suit better for Lee. He's looks too tall to be just 194 cm flat many of his films. Overall, I would like to believe 195 cm for Peak Christopher Lee.
The big O said on 27/Jan/17
So how tall was he in Lord of the rings? He dwarfed James Bond. Depending on how tall Roger Moore was. Will say 6'5 prime
Mark(5'9.25 said on 26/Jan/17
Rob, how likely is 6'4.75" peak for Lee?
Editor Rob: he could pull off looking almost 6ft 5, other times I thought a big 6ft 4 guy.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 13/Jan/17
In the section of 6'4.75"-6'5" in a dictionary, Christopher Lee is likely the dictionary definition of 6'4.75"-6'5".
Mark(5'9.25") said on 13/Jan/17
Similar to Ben Affleck and Joel kinnaman (who I consider is a 6'2.25" person.)

Edit* Rob, I'm so sorry. This comment was meant for Sean's connery's page! Could you delete both comments please?
mister_lennon said on 13/Jan/17
Who would be taller, christopher lee at peak or david prowse at peak? Very equal, i think.
Editor Rob: for me, the Prowse at age 30 I think would beat Lee.
Willes189 said on 12/Jan/17
6'4.75 is closer to the truth, Lee wasn't that comfortable with his nearly 6'5 frame
Mrs Gail J Gray said on 12/Jan/17
I love Christopher lee i have been a dedicated fan of him since 1958 i love all his films and a masterly awesome singing voice. My son is the same height as Christopher i feel like a midget against a great guy like Christopher and my son.
berta said on 12/Jan/17
i really dont think that vince vaugn was almost 2 cm taller than this guy at his peak. i think christopher lee was 195 ore weak 196
Mark(5'9.25 said on 11/Jan/17
Rob, I have a feeling that Lee would have edged out Alexander Skarsgard both at their prime even if it's less than an inch.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 11/Jan/17
@MadDrummer I wouldn't call it a lie. I would call it 'honesty' or 'humble' about his height. He downgrades himself which is not bad at all, but from what I've seen in his films, Lee's clearly over 6'4" without question. Anything under this listing would be ridiculous.

If anything, I'd happily give Christopher Lee the 195 cm mark without question or even 195 cm/196 cm with 194.5 cm at his lowest.

Like Rob said, he'd expected Lee to hit over 6'5" in the morning without question. That's really saying something because there are a number of people who is listed 6'4.5" that Lee could certainly edge out.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 8/Jan/17
I think out all of the actors in Hollywood, Christopher Lee is my favorite holly wood actor of all time. The moment i heard about his passing, I did want a day of silence for respect of him. He's really a humble man. No less of it!
MadDrummer said on 7/Jan/17
I'm pretty sure that Christopher Lee lied about his height to seem less intimidating. He definitely was as listed here in late middle age, but he was certainly a strong 6'5" in his prime.
Sandy Cowell said on 29/Dec/16
I have just punched 'Christopher Lee' into the Amazon services, and, just as expected, a load of his films came up!
Well, at this moment in time, I was looking for something more - perhaps a keepsake of this great icon, who has captured my interest for many years.
I'm so pleased to say that I found a reasonably-priced 'signed' photograph and I will frame it and treasure it.
Although he was over 90 when he passed, we still feel the pain. With all the celebrities we have lost this year, I feel that more than a bit of sentimentality lives on for these great stars in all of us.

I have a collage of pictures of my cats who are no longer in physical form. Now I think I might set up a little tribute wall in my home to the entertainers we have lost.
Mark(5'9.25 said on 7/Dec/16
Rob, is there a possibility that Christopher Lee would have hit a full 6'5" flat in the morning during his peak?
Editor Rob: Mark, I'd fully expect Lee to have been over 6ft 5 flat comfortably in the morning.
Sandy Cowell said on 10/Oct/16
Oh, the adorable Christopher Lee! I was so upset when he died. I read twice that he was 6ft5 and maybe he was in his heyday. I loved his voice and my favourite part was when he played a very knowledgeable fighter against evil in 'The Devil Rides Out' and who can forget his spendidly sinister dancing in 'The Wicker Man?'
Mark said on 5/Oct/16
Lee can be a full 6'5"
Mark said on 21/Sep/16
He's actually my favorite movie actor. Tall person and very warm and calm personality.

This guy would edge out Paladecki in his peak and would measure the same as Kobe Bryant at his peak.
Willes189 said on 29/Aug/16
Why is no one commenting on this page!
Richard Golen said on 30/Apr/16
I have a signed photo of Christopher Lee sent to me in the mid 1960s when he lived in Switzerland. I asked him a few questions, one of which was How tall are you? On the verso of the photo he answered this question with: 6' 4". I still have this photo with the info.
Willes190 said on 10/Dec/15
I think 6'5 is accurate for him
Sam said on 23/Oct/15
Rob, would you consider a 6'4.75" listing for Lee? Someone like Vincent Price can look near an inch shorter and I highly doubt under 6'4" for Price. Also, 6'7" listed James Arness looked at max 2 inches taller than Lee.
[Editor Rob: from what I've seen I think you could argue 6ft 4.5 or 4.75, for the moment I feel 4.5 is ok.]
heelshealheight said on 31/Aug/15
Definitely a 6'6" man in his youth. A timeless man and great actor, nonetheless. A true talent indicative of his stature and vice versa.
Sam said on 23/Jul/15
Yeah, I have a hard time picturing the young Lee measuring any shorter than say Tim Robbins, Joe Manganiello or Vince Vaughn.
Arch Stanton said on 2/Jul/15
There's still a good case for 6'4.75 for Lee, but if you really watch a lot of his films I don't think he looks quite a 196 6 ft 5 kind of guy, usually seems 6'4" range. He can look the full 6'5 in some films though.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Jul/15
Click Here

Now I was convinced Leon Greene was around a legit 6'4 guy, but if you see here Lee's looking at least an inch taller. 195cm for Lee is possible.
Gonzalo said on 18/Jun/15
He looked very close in height to Vincent Price in the video Edgar Hernández posted. So probably he was just 1`94 instead of 1`96 as I always thought.
Voiceless Dental Fricative said on 17/Jun/15
RIP, had incredible one of a kind voice and charisma. No one else like him.
177cmGuy said on 16/Jun/15
6'5. An actor with such significance that it didn't matter what type of film he was in. Not many actors can do this. Thanks sir. RIP
Bishop said on 16/Jun/15
Losing a lot of cinema legends. R.I.P.
Lorne??? said on 14/Jun/15
Oh man, I just found out from this site...

Terrible. RIP.

I still think 195cm, he clearly was taller than 6'4 guys like Vince Price. 194 is certainly believable though.

The last year we've lost some greats... I mean every year, but man, it just seems to be hitting hard lately. Maybe it's just me getting older...
Steve said on 12/Jun/15
He led a long, fascinating, productive life. Who can ask for any more?
hijopotamus said on 12/Jun/15
6'5" out of the coffin. Great actor Movie Legend.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 12/Jun/15
Very sorry to hear it his passing. A huge talent
184.3cm (Night) said on 12/Jun/15
RIP another true legend passes :(
Arch Stanton said on 12/Jun/15
My thoughts exactly like Sam. We've lost one of British cinema's greatest treasures!
OneNamePlease said on 12/Jun/15
Peak 195 cm, rest in peace Great actor
Modeus said on 11/Jun/15
read he was a direct descendant of charlemagne who has been listed between 184 and 192 cm who lived during the 8th century, that must have been extremely tall for this time like equivalent to a 6 ft 10 guy nowadays
172.4cm guy said on 11/Jun/15
RIP, to a talented, elegant, and professional actor. He leaves behind a great work of art. I will miss hearing his voicework too; such a commanding voice! Godspeed.
James B said on 11/Jun/15
RIP tall man
Sam said on 11/Jun/15
RIP, what an amazing career and an amazing life and he possessed a great, irreplaceable screen presence.
MJKoP said on 11/Jun/15
RIP, great actor.
Amaze said on 11/Jun/15
RIP. You will be missed. Good actor
Very tall!
6:4.5 194cm
Edgar_Hernández said on 2/Jun/15
Click Here
with Christopher Lee
Edgar_Hernández said on 2/Jun/15
Click Here
with solid 6f 4 vincent price: Christopher has the higher shoulder wich makes him look taller.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 19/Mar/15
"Peak height was 6ft 4Âľin (195cm)"
MrTBlack said on 7/Dec/14
6'4.5" seems like an golden height to me. Your 1/2" above the growth chart but your not quite "freakishly tall". Anyway yeah. I will say this many times, the general rule is if your a half inch above your height you omit the half inch example, say your 5'10.5" your suppose to write down 5'10" on any ID card unless your 5'10 3/4 then you say your 5'11".
draculas bride said on 3/Nov/14
I have loved him since I was at school I used to be scared if him, now I want him to come to me and bite my neck so I can be his eternally
Judd said on 3/Nov/14
I think he's today 6'2-2.5" and was at peak 6'4-4.5"!
Sam said on 22/Oct/14
How about an update to credits: "British actor best known for roles in films such as The Curse of Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Oblong Box, The Devil Rides Out, The Wicker Man, The Man with the Golden Gun, The Three Musketeers and film franchise such as the Dracula films by Hammer Studios, The Lord of the Rings, and the Star Wars prequels"?
[Editor Rob: yeah those extra few are worth mentioning.]
Arch Stanton said on 21/Oct/14
Arch Stanton says on 8/Oct/14
@Rob, when did the downgrade come and what convinced you on it? I think you're right though as I've been saying for some time, I've seen a lot of his films and mostly I struggle to see a 196 6'5", he could look a flat 6'4" in some films actually, 6'4.5" for me is spot on. He could look a full 6'5" next to Roger Moore and Edward Woodward though. 195cm also possible but I've long though 196 a bit high.
[Editor Rob: quite a few months ago, I think if he came up with the 6ft 4 and a half it seems a good shout for him.]

@Rob. Did he claim 6'4.5 after all then? Where/when was that? I always knew he was undercutting himself with a flat 6'4" but I wasn't too sure on a 196cm barefoot, at least after the morning. He was measured at 6'4.5 (194cm) by Guinness too I think, in fact I remember reading that in a Guinness book in the very bookstore I saw Woody Allen in NYC about 15 years back!!
[Editor Rob: while ago someone was certain he did claim it]
Arch Stanton said on 8/Oct/14
He did look 3.5 inches taller than Roger Moore granted, but honestly I must have seen at least 20 of his films and in most of them he seemed 6'4" range.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Oct/14
You got a picture of him from Dracula era or something too?
Arch Stanton said on 8/Oct/14
I think he'd have definitely cleared the 6'5" mark out of bed though.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Oct/14
@Rob, when did the downgrade come and what convinced you on it? I think you're right though as I've been saying for some time, I've seen a lot of his films and mostly I struggle to see a 196 6'5", he could look a flat 6'4" in some films actually, 6'4.5" for me is spot on. He could look a full 6'5" next to Roger Moore and Edward Woodward though. 195cm also possible but I've long though 196 a bit high.
[Editor Rob: quite a few months ago, I think if he came up with the 6ft 4 and a half it seems a good shout for him.]
k mart said on 7/Oct/14
Greg Is Right. Its Hard To Tell A Half Inch Difference In Height. In My Honest Opinion I Believe Christopher Lee Out Of Bed Was A Strong 6'5'' And A Strong 6'4.5'' at Night. Shoes Have A Half Inch Heel So. Lose 1/2 an Inch At Night. Shoes Make Up The Height Lost. Impossible To Tell The Difference :)
Greg said on 9/Sep/14
Not going to quibble about being 6'4.5" or 6'5" (I can't tell the difference between those two) but I think he was 6'5" when younger and looked it. Dude was very tall. He would sometimes say 6'4" in interviews because probably it didn't look good for an actor to appear be crazy tall (didn't Rock Hudson do the same thing?). Looked a good three or four inches taller than Roger Moore in "Man with the Golden Gun", and Moore had to have been at least 6'1" then.
James said on 19/Jul/14
The guy is 92 so obviously he's lost some height.
vmjmurphy said on 11/Jul/14
Here is the link to the interview again - Rob's link is broken. "Lee isn’t as tall as he once was, having, he thinks, lost about an inch from his full height of 6ft 5in, but he doesn’t stoop." Click Here
Magnusver said on 28/Apr/14
He once said that in old his age he had lost an inch and was now 6'4
avi said on 11/Apr/14
Probably 6'4.5 then said either 6'5 or 6'4 depending.
Sam said on 8/Apr/14
I'd bet there would no height difference between Joe Manganiello and Christopher Lee when he was at his peak.
Lorne said on 5/Apr/14
Click Here
Rob, scroll down a few paragraphs into that article. The interviewer claims that Crhis Lee said he thinks he has lost an inch from his peak height of 6ft5, but the direct quote isn't there. But then I have seen him claim 6'4 a few times as well. But, this is two articles claiming he said 6ft5 peak, and that he's lost height. Both (relatively) recent interviews, so he must be saying he's lost height. But did he say 6'5? I wish I could find a direct quote...
[Editor Rob: he could have just said I've lost an inch and not said 'I was 6ft 5', it's hard to tell from the interview.]
Lorne said on 5/Apr/14
I'd give him 195, he was taller than legit 6'4 Vincent Price. He look 6'5, but claimed 6'4, so 194-195 range. Certainly no less than this, it is clear he rounds down. I rean an article, he said he had lost height, and was 6'5, but was now only 6'3. But, it didn't have a direct quote. Wish we could find one...
avi said on 5/Apr/14
Well yeah a strong 6'4 maybe...but if Moore was 6'1 flat or really 6'0.75 then Lee can't be much over. I think 6'4.5 most but 6'4.25. Now he's in 6'2 area
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 1/Mar/14
I think 195cm peak is a fairer estimate, if not the full 6ft5.
A flat 6ft4 is too low for him. He was definitely playing it down a bit like most really tall actors.

I agree that recently he's looking 6ft2.5-6ft3 tops.
avi said on 5/Dec/13
@Arch Stanton says on 7/Nov/13
Very good movie but Woodward at 5'9 makes Lee seem a strong 6'4 so I'd say 6'4.5 is fair now weak 6'2.5. And yeah 3.25 on Moore I think no "Moore" than that!
Arch Stanton said on 7/Nov/13
Anybody have any idea who the massive bearded guy was in the Wicker Man who carries Woodward? He looked surely 6 ft 8 as he looked noticeably bigger than even Christopher Lee.
Arch Stanton said on 7/Nov/13
Mmm maybe. Looking at him proportionally he does look more 6'5" than 6'4" seeing him walking through the garden with Woodward.
Arch Stanton said on 7/Nov/13
LOL Christopher Lee looks like Sacha Baron's Bruno in the Wicker Man!!
Arch Stanton said on 7/Nov/13
Watching The Wicker Man now, really good film, great folk music like soundtrack and an endearing Scottish location. Rural Scotland is soooo beautiful. The look of the film reminds me a bit of Ryan's Daughter, although that was set in Ireland. And Britt Ekland and Ingrid Pitt in the same film is certainly a treat for the eyes! No way does Lee look 7 inches taller though. Woodward is level with the crook in Lee's nose, that's more 6 inches.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Oct/13
If you watch Dracula from 1958 for instance he looks more 6'4" than 6'5" IMO as he did in a lot of films. I think he could have been 196 morning height but it's difficult to see him that high all day. I still think he was more a strong 6'4" guy rather than a solid 6'5" guy. The Vincent Price thing is baffling me though because I thought having seen their separate films that they similar range. It's easy to get carried away with him because he was skinny. I mean somebody like James Cromwell to me looks a good 2 inches taller on screen than Lee ever did. Whatever he was he remains a towering legend, and it was great to see Johnny Depp's fitting tribute to him.
Arch Stanton said on 20/Oct/13
Photos like Click Here are crazy. He looks 6'6" range there and Vincent Price strangely looks 189-90! I've seen enough of Price's films to know that he looked a proper 6'4" guy at peak but I haven't seen too many of his post 60s films.
Arch Stanton said on 20/Oct/13
Rob what would you think a reasonable out of bed measurement could have been for his peak, 197 cm? I can see near 6'5.5" out of bed and 6'5" morning but I have a job believing he was a strong 6'5" guy and I see him as more a weak one who'd have been between 6'4" and 6'5" at some point in the day. When you see him next to guys like Moore, Cushing and Price he really did look a full 6'5" but sometimes if stood alone especially he could seem shorter than that.When you saw him in 2006 he was mid 80s so if you saw him at 189-90 I think on average that would be, what, a loss of 6-7 cm, from peak? It seems to add up to a peak of 6'5" doesn't it.
[Editor Rob: he could have been between 6ft 4 and 5 and simply went with 6ft 4 when saying his height...]
Arch Stanton said on 20/Oct/13
Vincent Price was a proper 6'4" guy yeah, not buying anything under peak. Always looked it consistently. Lee could often not seem as high as 6'5" in the Dracula films, especially the 1958 original, but if you see him next to Cushing in particular you can see he was nearer 6'5" than 6'4". I think he might have measured 196cm barefoot in the morning peak but I see him more as a weak 6'5", sort of like Joe Manganiello/Darius Danesh.
Spaniard68 said on 6/Oct/13
Your comment makes a lotta sense to me, thank you Mr.Sam
Mark said on 5/Oct/13
Lee, to me and based on The Man with The Golden Gun movie and photos there-of, could just about see over the top of Moore's head. That's almost 5 inches. Moore was either shorter than 6'2 or 6'1, or Lee was "at least" 6'4, plus a few fractions.
Sam said on 3/Oct/13
The answer IMO, Spaniard68, is that Christopher Lee, while in the 6'4"+ range was seemingly more like 6'4.75" than an even 6'4". Factor in that the Price was 11 years older and I believe less physically fit than Lee. Price could have lost a solid inch somewhere in middle age. That might result in the younger, better-postured Lee looking around 2 inches taller.
Spaniard68 said on 30/Sep/13
If Lee was 6'4"in his prime then how tall was Mr. Price? In the picture with Cushing,Carradine, and Vincent Price, Lee is taller than Price by 2 inches, maybe he has floor advantage.I quite agree with Mr.Stanton that Lee looks 5in.taller than Peter Cushing.When I was a child I remember reading in magazines Chris Lee was( 1,95m)...6'4,75"...Something doesn´t seem to add up in the pictures with Price...Price was for sure 6'4"...Sometimes Lee looks taller than him by 2 or more inches....floor unevenness? Was he a solid 6'5"?...If your shoulder line is high you can look taller than you really are.This height issue is very curious, ain´t it? anyways, Lee looked impressive in his movies.The starting point of being tall is 5'11" in Spain, the average height for a man is 5'10" So I think anything beyond 6'3" Is super tall.
Arch Stanton said on 10/Sep/13
Roger Moore did look near 6'2" in The Last Time I Saw Paris.
Arch Stanton said on 10/Sep/13
A case for 6'4.5" peak could be made, I mean in a lot of films he didn't quite look as high at 196cm, but I think he was nearer 6'5" than 6'4" anyway and he was one of those actors who dislike being too tall and downgrade. ..
Arch Stanton said on 10/Sep/13
Maio says on 6/Sep/13
Christopher Lee was never a full 6 ft 5 in. I think he was close to 6 ft 4 in/193 cm, maybe 6 ft 4.25 but no more. He wasn't more than 3 in taller than Roger Moore who for sure wasn't 6 ft 2, but probably 6 ft 1.25 in at most, so Lee was in the 193-194 cm range.

Yes he was. He was between 3 and 4 inches taller than Moore, I asked Rob once and he agreed. Roger Moore was 6'1.5" peak.
Arch Stanton said on 10/Sep/13
Rob do you think Lee, Sterling Hayden and Rock Hudson being 6'5" in their generation (average 5'7") would be equivalent to a 6'7"-6'8" guy today? Strangely although average was near 5'7" then Hollywood had high number of 6'3" r 6'4" didn't it? Nearly every classic film I see there's a 6'1 or 6'3" guy in it.
[Editor Rob: maybe like 6ft 6-6.5 today ]
Sam said on 9/Sep/13
At peak, I think he was probably very similar in height to Tim Robbins, Alexander Skarsgard, Randy Quaid. I think he's convincingly over 6'4" but not by a whole lot.
Lorne said on 14/Aug/13
@avi has a point, Rob. The guy has said a thousand times he was 6ft4, so what gives? I've heard him referred to as "the 6ft5 Dracula, but TCM also said 6'4. I just don't know, I guess if he manages 6'2.5-6'3 he was 6'5, a guy his age and size would have easily lost 5-6 cm at age 80, but man, he h. e empathetic about being 6ft4. Though again, maybe being British, he measured 194-195cm and ignored the fraction?
Brian said on 13/Aug/13
'In Man with the Golden Gun'
Moore was not above 185-186 cm / 6'1-6'1.25 in 1974, actually he was already 47 years old and maybe shrunk 1 cm since his youth.
I think Lee was 195 cm / 6'4.75 at his peak and he was there 52 years old, so i think he shrunk 1 cm too and so he was 194 cm at this time.
So it is most likely that in their youth Lee was 195 cm / 6'4.75.
Moore was 6'1.25-6'1.5 in his peak i think.
Now there both 85+ and may shrunk at least 1 inch.
avi said on 12/Aug/13
@Rampage(-_-_-)Clover says on 11/Aug/13
i htink 6'1.75 is too high for Moore. he claimed 6'1 he was maybe 6'1.25 or 6'1.5 nowadays maybe 6'0.5. assuming Moore IS 6'1.5 than Lee was 6'4.5 so you'd be right. truthfully it was probably Moore at 6'1.25 and Lee at 6'4.25 solid 3 inches. Moore was told to walk up straight since his early acting days he walked like a 5'10 or 5'11 man and was yelled at and ever since he walked at his full strong 6'1. Lee seemed to have decent posture but he may have dropped a bit making him look 6'4 as opposed to a weak 6'5.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 11/Aug/13
In 1974
Christopher Lee 6ft4.5-6ft4.75
Roger Moore 6ft1.5-6ft1.75
avi said on 2/Aug/13
@Ian C. says on 2/Aug/13

Your question is simple. He reported his height in 1 inch shoes OR is 6'4 and change and rounds down. I'm 6'0 flat and say 5'11.5 or almost 6'0. This isn't surprising as 6'5 is not exactly a very distinguished height unless your career is basketball or other sports or specific things that may have a need for being so massive.
Ian C. said on 2/Aug/13
Lee stated emphatically that he was six foot four on the first page of his autobiography (Tall Dark and Gruesome). I wouldn't presume to doubt the analyses of the experts on this site, but why would he round his height down when he was so eager to brag about it? In fact, why would anyone lie about his height by an inch, unless it was to bring it in line with some magic benchmark like six feet?
Lorne said on 1/Aug/13
This guy really could look a legit 6'5. I always though his 6'4 claim was a downgrade, he was taller than Vincent price, a legit 6'4 guy, so no less than a solid 194cm. And really looks more 6'5 range than 6'4.5. But why claim 6'4? Is it possible he was rounding down? Maybe me measured 195cm and just went with 6'4, cause he thought 6'5 was too much. Remember someone his size COULD lose 4cm from morning to night. He could have woke up a full 6'6, and 6ft4.75 night. If he really did range from 6'4.75 to 6'6 then 6'5 is fair. But then he always could have just thought 6'4, but it seems likely he was rounding down( like Lee Pace rounding down 6ft3.5-6ft3.75 to 6'3 flat.
avi said on 1/Aug/13
He had solid 3 inches on 6'1 roger Moore he never towered him. He is 6'4 never was 6'5 but he isn't far from it. He can appear taller than 6'4 because he's lanky. Not sure why people are carrying on saying he's 6'5. In 1974 he'd lose no height he was 50 only. He didn't lose much til 80...peter Cushing seems 5'11 which would put Lee at 6'4. I'm sure Lee was a strong 6'4 and 6'5 and change in shoes. Its even possible Lee reported his 6'5 claim in shoes.
Sam said on 31/Jul/13
The Guinness Books of Movie Facts that I have states that Lee is the tallest leading man (it came out before Vince Vaughn was a star) at 6'5". However, he states in his autobiography two times that he's 6'4". Why do think he claims 6'4" Rob if he's really taller?
afka9 said on 29/Jul/13
now,he look a good 187-188 cm
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 11/Jul/13
Moore looked 6ft2 if this guy was truly 6ft5
Kyuss said on 23/Jun/13
6-5" peak looks very possible imo.
Alex said on 19/Apr/13
You mean 6 feet.
John said on 17/Apr/13
Hes barely 6 inches now, let alone 6'3 lol
Arch Stanton said on 14/Apr/13
Click Here

Christopher Lee does look easily 5 inches taller here than supposed 6'0 Peter Cushing.
Arch Stanton said on 11/Apr/13
Lee's probably 6'2" today, but for a 90 year old man 6'2"-6'3" is super tall. You rarely see a man over 80 over 185cm.
Lucio said on 30/Mar/13
Rob, but in the movie "The man who could cheat death" Christopher Lee next to Anton Driffing who was listed as 5'11", looks near 191 cm rather than 196 cm. What do you think?
Click Here
[Editor Rob: I've not seen the movie, although in that still there'd be more difference than it suggest because of Anton being a bit much difference, I'd need to watch it]
James said on 24/Feb/13
Well Arch what do you think of 6'1 flat for roger Moore?

If Moore was 6'1.5 then Christopher Lee looked a legit 6'5 in comparison. Keep in mind as well that Lee was no fresh spring chicken in 1974.

I think rob might have him spot on at 6'5. He could have been a 6'5 guy who looked 6'4.5 or might have shrunk more during the day.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Feb/13
Darius Danesh reminds me of a younger Christopher Lee in terms of height and build. There is a clip of him on youtube singing opera and with slicked back hair and a long black cloak he reminds me of a young Christopher Lee. And Darius I think is 6'4.5".
Arch Stanton said on 22/Feb/13
Well Lee did have 3 and a half inches on Roger Moore, so I think he had to have been near it. But Christopher Lee didn't quite look a full 6'5" in the 50s and 60s films I've seen either. I'd go more with 6'4.5". He didn't appear as big as Rock Hudson to me. I was watching some of his Dracula films at Christmas and he didn't look over 6'4".
Jamesy said on 25/Jan/13
Do u agree Arch that he looked more 6'4 in Man with the Golden Gun?
Arch Stanton said on 19/Jan/13
That should make a guy seem taller not shorter James! I've been watching a fair few of his old movies of late I've got to say he does seem more 6'4" than 6'5" in a lot of them.
James said on 7/Jan/13
Sometimes he could look shorter than 6'5 cause he has a long head
Original said on 24/Dec/12
6'5 peak".
r said on 12/Dec/12
Was never 6'5 6'3.5 in his 40s and 6'4 in his 20s
Gregg said on 7/Dec/12
For some reason the initial listing has Lee at 6'5" but as I remember he has always said in interviews that he was 6'4", why would he underestimate his height? In any case at his age 6'3" isn't surprising.
Sam said on 30/Nov/12
He may have been a true peak 195 cm but I can't seem him under it at all. Morning height at peak 196-197 cm, me thinks.

Lee with 6'0" Peter Cushing:
Click Here
with Cushing, 6'4" Vincent Price & 6'1.25" (per web) John Carradine (the latter two must have lost some height by then):
Click Here
with Cushing & 5'3.5" Sammy Davis Jr. (LOL):
Click Here
with Price (who must be dropping some height with his leg positioning):
Click Here
Arch Stanton said on 29/Nov/12
Watched another of his earlier films the other day and again I didn't think he looked quite 6 ft 5.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Nov/12
Watching Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll now. Doesn't look more than 6'4" and as tall as 6'5". In fact the actress Dawn Adams must be very tall as she's only about 3-4 inches shorter than him in heels. She's probably 5'9"-5'10" range.
Copnovelist195 said on 9/Nov/12
He towered over Roger Moore in The Man With The Golden Gun (and he claimed to be 6ft1.) I'm 6ft5 myself and I can quite believe he was too (at his peak).
Arch Stanton said on 4/Nov/12
Question for you Rob below.
[Editor Rob: I don't know if they actually measured, if you look at the stuntman Kiran Shah, he had a very specific height as he actually was measured. Here]
Arch Stanton said on 3/Nov/12
195cm peak I think is about right, he did always look 6 ft 6 ish in shoes. Rob what do you think the Guinness issue is? Do you think they measured both Christopher and Vince at 194cm barefoot? I'm pretty sure with height they usually like to formally measure people barefoot. I saw a documentary once with a short fat Guinness guy measuring a 6 ft 10 inch Thai girl.
johnny said on 8/Oct/12
Clint Walker is still alive at 85 but I haven't seen any photos of him in old age. His peak height was 6 ft 6 inches (198 cms I think). Does anyone know how tall he is likely to be now as a very old man?
johnny said on 8/Oct/12
Clint Walker is still alive at 85 but I haven't seen any photos of him in old age. His peak height was 6 ft 6 inches (198 cms I think). Does anyone know how tall he is likely to be now as a very old man?
Denis said on 6/Oct/12
Lee had barely only a full inch on 6'3" Samuel L. Jackson in Star Wars Episode II. So 6'4" seems about right for Lee's height.
Legit 6 footer said on 29/Sep/12
In the picture below with Kristinna Loken (~5'10")he looks about 6'3", was she wearing heels or not?
EdgarHernandez said on 27/Aug/12
I know shaun, is just that is weird to see people and how they(like we said in Mexico), dan el viejazo.
Shaun said on 24/Aug/12
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:

He's 90 years old! I'd like to see how you look at 90! Most 90 year old men have terrible age spots and stuff on the face like Lee has.
Beastman said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 18/Jan/12
Easily gave off a 6'5" impression in The Man with the Golden Gun.
Beastman said 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 said 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 said on 4/Nov/11
Peak 1,95m which he rounded down to 6'4
LAN Jiao said on 30/Oct/11
Peak 194, now 189.
EdgarHernandez said 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 said 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 said on 12/Aug/11
Strong 6 5 in 1973 movie wicker man
Shaun said 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. said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 15/Jul/11
i don't think he was ever over 6'5.
Mohammed said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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) said 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 said on 14/May/11
Click Here

Looks about 9-10 inches taller than 5'6" George Lucas here at age 80 odd.
Shaun said 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 said on 14/May/11
Johan Cruyff says on 30/Apr/11
Christopher Lee's real heights were:

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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 30/Apr/11
Christopher Lee's real heights were:

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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 14/Mar/11
Click Here
This shows the height difference of him with Moore
Danimal said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 15/Dec/10
6'4'' 1/2 according to what he said himself in a Brit tv show about his life.
EdgarHernandez said 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 said 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 said 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 said 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 said on 23/Nov/10
Edgar rob saw him at a weak 6'3 though 4 years ago.
Edgar Hernandez said 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 said on 10/Nov/10
6'2.25 (189cm) today.
mrknowitall said on 3/Nov/10
i saw him and i'm 6'2" and 13, he looked about 6'3-6'4"
EdgarHernandez said on 27/Oct/10
thanks james
Marcelo C. said on 2/Oct/07
I do agree Michael, in "The man with the Golden Gun" 6-1 Moore looks quite shorter than Lee. So, 6 ft 5/6 will do.
Michael said on 12/Sep/07
I think it is possible that Christopher Lee was infact 6 ft 5 to 6 ft 6 ins with shoes in his younger days. He looked large in a lot of films. My aunt used to work for a television company in the 1970s and saw this very large man with big hands, which were of Lee. She never commented about his height. However, when I read a profile of the Saint and James Bond actor, Roger Moore in a Film Preview book from the late 1950s or early 1960s, it said his height was 6 ft 2 ins, which of course would make Christopher at least 3 inches or more taller in the Bond movie - The Man with the Golden Gun.
Catsman said on 12/Sep/07
He got his big break playing a monster when Bernard Bresslaw's agent asked for too much money and Hammer didn't want to pay. They were two of the tallest quality actors working in Britain in the 50, 60, and 70s so they got all those kind of parts. Rob, you should also list Bresslaw, he was a star.
Chip said on 17/Aug/07
He must keep himself in great health. He was born in 1922, and he doesn't seem like he's lost any height. Christopher Lee rules!
Mr. T said on 2/Aug/07
He's in pretty astounding shape for an old man. Much like Clint Eastwood, but Lee's voice has nearly the same gravity as it did in his youth.
glenn said on 24/Mar/07
he was a great i hear he doesnt sign much and he makes posing with him difficult.he does do it.but will sometimes not.
Jordan said on 23/Mar/07
Glenn, Lee is a cool cat, I think he would be nice to you and grant a picture.
Viper said on 23/Mar/07
Rob, are you sure he only looked 6-2-6-3 back in Oct. 2006? I thought he looked around 6-4 in fairly recent pictures.

[Editor Rob: yes, put it this way, about 10-15 minutes earlier I saw matt frewer and he gave more of a 6ft 3 impression than Mr Lee did, surprisingly.]
glenn said on 23/Mar/07
really? i saw 6-4 in 1989.i was so nervous i didnt ask for the photo with.i didnt start this yet
Brad said on 23/Mar/07
The guy was a legit 6' 5" during his Hammer Dracula films.
Glenn2 said on 14/Mar/07
i met him there about a year ago when i was with my brother. My bro is dead on 6'3 and Lee was eye to eye with him
Gotxo said on 3/Feb/07
Let's give him a current 6'3", in an interview dating back 2001 (El mundo, Spanish newspaper) he's described as "only" a plain 190cm.
He might have declined a bit more in height but probably is quite near to it.
Editor Rob said on 29/Nov/06
Definitely shrunk by now, well in October 2006 he had. Looking 6ft 2-3.
Jordan said on 17/Nov/06
Lee is way taller then 6'1.5 and rarely ever looks shorter then 6'3. So 6'1.5 is really unlikely. If that was the case Roger Moore would be 5'8.
Ed said on 14/Nov/06
Ralph, where do you 6ft1.5 from? It's apparent Lee has shrunk a bit, but did you see the 2005 premiere pics for Revenge of the Sith. If Lee is only 6ft1.5, than that would put Sam Jackson at 5ft11.5 and Christensen at around 5ft10. I can't see Lee anything less than 6ft2.5 or 6ft3, with Jackson at 6ft1 maybe a hair more, and Christensen at 5ft11.5. Rob saw him recently, and pegged him at about 6ft2 to 6ft3, I'm guessing that's a barefoot estimate since he didn't say, so that would put Lee at between 6ft3 and 6ft4 with shoes.
ralph said on 13/Nov/06
Like Fidel Castro, he was in the 6'4"-6'5" range at young age, but they both became old and shrunked. Both men are 6'1.5" now.
Ed said on 12/Nov/06
I completely agree Viper, I think Jackson was near 6ft2 at one time and that's it.
Viper652 said on 10/Nov/06
Jackson looks 6-1 Max now.
Franco said on 11/Oct/06
i'm 6'4" (1.93cm) exactly and i saw Christopher Lee on 2 occasions in Italy walking in the streets of Venice he was purchasing a little gift (arlecchino doll) and i said hi to him, i noticed he was about 1 - 1.5cm taller than me so i guess he is 1.93cm, and i agree his posture is great. really kind man and he even joked with a few italian words he knew. :-D excellent actor too.

so from personal experience i'd say he his real height is 1.94cm and with shoes about 1.95cm, i say so because i am 1.94cm with shoes and since he was 1cm taller and the street was EVEN, then he is 1.95cm with shoes and 1.94cm without.
he can't be 1.93cm because that would make me 1.92cm (unless i shrink that day) lol which is highly unlikely.
Mikex said on 11/Oct/06
Jordan, yeah Lee had trouble getting acting parts when young because he was tall. This was at a time when 6ft was tall let alone 6'5''. Also he had dark exotic looks at a time when the preference in leading men was for those with typical Anglo-Saxon features. It's seems to have worked out for him in the end though. His distinctiveness seems to have aided his longevitivity.
Stephen said on 11/Oct/06
At least 6'4" without shoes. I'd say about 6'4.5". Great actor!

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, shoe or bra 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.