How tall is Hugh Jackman

Hugh Jackman's Height

6ft 1.5in (187 cm)

Peak height was 6ft 2in (188 cm)
Australian actor best known for his role as The Wolverine in the X-Men series of movies. Other notable films include The Prestige, Les Miserables, Australia, Prisoners and Swordfish. The Van Helsing director Stephen Sommers described Hugh as being "six-foot-two and 210 pounds of solid steel", a height which Hugh himself has said numerous times:
I'm 6-foot-2, so I'm too tall to sit comfortably in most chairs.
Before I had any kind of acting profile I was encouraged to lie about my height. I was told to say I was about six foot [1.83m] tall. I was worried about it when I first had my audition because pleasing fans of the franchise is important. My height was brought up on the Internet. They didn't think it was right. A lot of people who never met me think I'm very short.
If someone's going to spend their time saying, 'You're really not 6' 2"; you're 5' 10",' I'll tell them once, 'I am 6' 2".' Then, whatever you want to believe, it's up to you. Am I going to waste energy going, 'I'm so mad that this person says I'm 5' 10"?' We really only get mad when there's an element of truth, right?"

How tall is Hugh Jackman
5ft 10.5 Nicole Kidman with Hugh
Photos by PR Photos / evaRinaldi / Siebbi

You May Be Interested

Height of Russell Crowe
Russell Crowe
5ft 10.5in (179 cm)
Height of Gerard Butler
Gerard Butler
6ft 1.25in (186 cm)
Height of Ben Affleck
Ben Affleck
6ft 2.25in (189 cm)
Height of Ryan Reynolds
Ryan Reynolds
6ft 2in (188 cm)

Add a Comment 250 comments

Average Guess (48 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 2.03in, Current: 6ft 1.51in
Jay said on 4/Dec/16
He's been with Affleck and they really look to be on the same eye level. Same with Reynolds, although last I checked you guys were a bit conflicted with him.
DINO said on 22/Nov/16
6'2
shiva 181 cms said on 8/Nov/16
He's a 6'1.75 guy in his prime now hes no more than 6'1.25 maybe on a good day he might measure 6'1.5

His peak out of bed height estimate would be 189-190 cms and evening height would be187-188cms he has a short torso he wouldn't have shrunk more than 2cms
Bobby said on 7/Nov/16
He can easily look 6'3 even today when he's nearing 50 years old. So 6'2 seems about right, but it's strange, he can look 6'4 at times. He looked especially tall in The Wolverine. Maybe he was wearing special shoes, who knows. Even the taller actors are known for wearing shoe lifts, but Hugh seems very honest about his height.
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 3/Nov/16
6'2" in his peak.
King of the hill 91 said on 3/Nov/16
Its hard because he gives the impreshion of 187 cm at most but as well he can 188 to 189 cm peake and know 187 to 188 now 189 peak no more
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 29/Oct/16
I'm surprised, but he appeared to be almost the same as Ben Affleck. Maybe he is taller than I thought.
Brett said on 27/Oct/16
Rob... Hope you are well... I saw Jackman not so long ago, in a Gym in Bondi.

I have a picture of him and I... he was slightly bigger... I'd peg him at 6'2" for sure.

Happy to send it through :)
Editor Rob: it's definitely worth linking to, why not use imgur.com or something to upload and add a comment.
Johan said on 20/Oct/16
Yes and Brandon Routh is easily 6'3".





No wait he is 6'2.5". Next to Beckham also looks this listing ( 6'1.5") max. I can even see an argument for 6'1.25".
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 18/Oct/16
Still near 6ft2 today.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Oct/16
Every inch of 6ft2 peak and no less.
Brandon said on 2/Oct/16
Almost 50, heavy weight lifting for quite a few years, and possibly just bad genetics when it comes to his skeleton, height loss for him isn't insane or anything.
6'2" peak
6'1.25"ish today
Roy said on 1/Oct/16
Is he old enough to have a peak height? Must be all the weight lifting shrinking him down.
S.J.H said on 30/Sep/16
Theres a celebrity forum discussion about hugh jackman physics and height. An aussie teen who claim 6'1-1/4 barefoot saying no way jackman was taller than him and post a full picture with jackman a year ago , aussie teen looking 2cm taller jackman with similar footwear that makes jackman 6'0.5 but i don't buy that since this guy doesn't post a picture he get measure and he could be growing taller since he was only 18 as he mention on that forum. He could be grow out a bit at 6'2 with jackman. I think jackman is not quite 6'1.5 maybe 6'1.25 sticking my oldest guessing
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 26/Sep/16
He's no taller than 187 CM Gerard Butler.
James B said on 22/Sep/16
I don't think Bale is a legit 6ft
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 20/Sep/16
Looking 6ft3 w/h Travolta
Click Here
Click Here

...and again w/h Bale
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

at least 1in taller than Dominic Purcell
Click Here
Click Here


189cm is hardly a joke...
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 20/Sep/16
In the 2000's he was usually labelled as 6ft2, 6ft2½ and occasionally 6ft3.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 18/Sep/16
@Willes189: He could certainly look it at times in the past w/h guys like Travolta and Bale. A very solid 6ft2 guy in his 20's-30's is a good shout (i.e. 188.3cm or something like that). I think he may very well have measured a similar range to Affleck, Reynolds and Cusack.

187cm range seems a little low for his peak, IMO.
Andrea said on 18/Sep/16
6'2.5 is a big joke for Hugh... You can see him with Brandon Routh, who IS a legit 6'2.5 guy and looks at least an inch taller! And Daniel too... Btw, in case you don't know, Daniel himself did claim to have been measured at 6'6.5... So, no, he's not 200-202! Hugh has never been a full 6'2, let alone over that mark! Today, there's more than one picture where he can look BARELY 6'1!
Willes189 said on 17/Sep/16
Don't know about that Rob.. He looks 200-202cm in that photo, or something like that, Extremly Tall Guy!!

And let's take everything that has the name Charles Barkley in the title with a grain of salt. Just look at how he made 6'2.5-6'3 The Rock look like.. No way on earth that the guy is 6'4 range, and it's impossible for him to be with his genes, his dad is 7'0!

6'2.25 is still very possible for peak Jackman
Willes189 said on 15/Sep/16
Rampage

What would you guess Jackman's peak height to be? IMDb has him at 6'2 1/2 now, could that be a good guess?
Editor Rob: he only claims 6ft 2, if you see him beside a genuine 6ft 6.5 Cudmore: Cudmore vs Jackman, also with Barkley...I doubt I'd list Daniel 6ft 6 and then put Jackman 6ft 2.5.

It would be impossible to really argue those figures.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 14/Sep/16
Anything under 6ft2 peak is a joke. Just look at him w/h Travolta in Swordfish.
Willes189 said on 13/Sep/16
I miss the late 90s and early 00s (00-10) Hugh Jackman... What a guy he was back then :(

Rob, are you sure that 6'2.25 is out of question? I just re-watched The Prestige yesterday, for the 3rd time (outstanding movie) ,and he looked really tall next to 6'0 Bale, he made him look under average in some parts of the movie
Editor Rob: yes The Prestige is a great film, I think about 6ft 2 is ok for him, I could see an argument of a late 90's Jackman looking a solid 6ft 2 at times though.
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 12/Sep/16
Ryan Reynolds is known for almost never standing up straight, so he generally has looser posture than Hugh Jackman does.
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 12/Sep/16
Ryan Reynolds is known for almost never standing up straight, so he generally has looser posture than Hugh Jackman does.
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 12/Sep/16
Ryan Reynolds is known for almost never standing up straight, so he generally has looser posture than Hugh Jackman does.
shiva 181 cms said on 8/Sep/16
Hugh jackman's peak height is (6'1.75) and now (6'1.25) he appeared very tall in all x-men series and all his movies but he appears tall because of his long limbs and average torso a small head for his height one need not be a strong 6'2 guy to be tall or appaer tall his stature is pretty tall if he had a head size like reynolds to his high shoulders he could have been an easy 189 cms guy in his peak , there a cm b/w them
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Sep/16
@Willes189: First off, I don't think there's as much as 2cm between Jackman and Reynolds. Hugh I think was a strong 6ft2 and is now a weak 6ft2. Reynolds who is almost 10 years younger than Jackman is currently a strong 6ft2. Back to back in their prime they were identical, I feel
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Sep/16
@Willes189: First off, I don't think there's as much as 2cm between Jackman and Reynolds. Hugh I think was a strong 6ft2 and is now a weak 6ft2. Reynolds who is almost 10 years younger than Jackman is currently a strong 6ft2. Back to back in their prime they were identical, I feel
josh jeffords said on 5/Sep/16
Funny I remember him being listed 6 4 at the time the first xmen came out comic geeks will notice that is a full foot taller than the canon one.
He looked quite tall in those flicks but was likely wearing boots think he tends to favor them.
In photos he looks 6 7 next to the hobbit reject macavoy and tall next to fassbender.
he is not 5 10 but after all the weird diets and bodybuilding he is likely 6 1 or so now.
Willes189 said on 2/Sep/16
This is a hard one Rampage, he was probably 187.5-188cm (6'2), but that sweet 6'2.5 mark could be out of reach for him 00-05, Reynolds is in his peak now and looks 0.25 inches taller then peak Jackman. But then Reynolds is probably more 189.5cm, 190cm is a stretch for him

Peak Hugh 187.5 (6'2) could he relly be 188-189 (6'2.25) at peak?. I'm going to start my re-investigation on Jackman's peak height this weekend, i want to believe that he was 6'2.25 at peak

Reynolds 189.5 (6'2.25-6'2.5) tall guy, he is keeping it low profile
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 31/Aug/16
Looked more 6ft2-2½ range than 6ft1½-2 in the early 2000's.
Willes189 said on 21/Aug/16
I belive he peaked at around 187.5cm and stands at 186.3-186.4cm today i still think he would measure over the 186cm mark today
Willes189 said on 21/Aug/16
I'm not happy to say that i agree, i used to think that Hugh was one of the most solid 6'2 guys in Hollywood, he looked so tall on screen in X-men 1&2, and his officiall height seemed to be 189cm everywhere on the internet back in 00-05
gian92 said on 14/Aug/16
In recent photo near Ryan Reynolds he looks 186 cm max
Dmeyer said on 13/Aug/16
rob is 6 1.75 peak and 6 ft 1.25 now possible
Editor Rob: it's arguable for him yes.
Sexton1 said on 10/Aug/16
This is a funny one. He's not old, but he does seem to have lost height—and Rob's got a very good eye for these things.

Still, I'm not sure the heavy lifting would have caused the loss as opposed to age/genetics/postural issues. The study that Rob and others like to cite showing the effect of weightlifting on spinal degeneration was done on Olympic weightlifters, who, although they were mostly only in their mid-20s at the time, would still have done 10+ years of extreme training of a kind that is impossible to imagine for a non-elite athlete (we're talking 2 times a day, six days week, lifting massive loads explosively at a high volume). Jackman, although he's done plenty of "heavy" lifting for a civilian, wouldn't have done anything like that.

The study I take my bearings from on this issue is the well-known Finnish twin study. They compared the spines of twins where one twin had done heavy labor over a lifetime or been a truck driver, anything that appears to put great stress on the back, while the other had been, say, an office worker. The differences, at least as they appeared on an MRI, were negligible, suggesting spinal degeneration is mostly genetic.

And even then, it's not clear how much of standing height loss is attributable to actual spinal degeneration and how much to muscular degeneration and general postural decline related to age. I've had friends, athletes who get measured regularly, who've had serious spinal injuries and have pretty much lost a whole disc or two, and it's made no measurable difference to their afternoon standing height, which suggests that, if spinal degeneration does make a great difference, it's really through degeneration through the whole link of the spine, and not the kind of localised damage that occurs as a result of training and injuries (which fits with the fact that old people's spines don't lengthen as much as young people's spines under traction).

As for the pro wrestlers, who really do seem to lose height with age, this reflects, I think, the fact that their heights were inflated when they were young, and the general physical detonation that seems to afflict wrestlers as a result of the lifestyle—not only constant falling and injuries, but endless travel on the road, drug abuse etc. Most of these guys are just in pretty bad general shape by the time they get to 50 or so, not standing as tall as they once did.
Mike said on 7/Aug/16
I'm still thinking he was 6ft 2 at one point. I strictly remember In X-Men Origins: Wolverine in a scene with 187 Danny Huston, he looked to have 0.5 to 1 inch on him, which would make him 189 cm...
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 27/Jul/16
Looked nothing under 6ft2 10-15 years ago and more often could appear 189cm zone
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 20/Jul/16
Rob, would you say that the difference between Nicole Kidman's eye level to the top of the head is likely more signifcant than Hugh Jackman's? The eye level difference between the two looks to be 4 CM, but I see 2 CM tops between them in that photo.
Editor Rob: a slight downtilt from Nicole and it will make her eyelevel look bigger, which I think is happening...although she too has what I would believe is half inch of hair.
Arron said on 19/Jul/16
Click Here

Rob what do you think of them photos. I think he looked 189cm early 2000s but now a bit shorter probably around 187cm.
Editor Rob: the daily mail site is very resource intensive, so I don't visit it much, but Jackman I don't think was more than 188 15 years ago.
jajamen said on 17/Jul/16
Rob, Would 6'1.75 would be his maximum height at the age he is right now?
Editor Rob: somewhere around 187cm range I think today, but 15 years ago I do think he was nearer 188cm.
Lenad 5ft9.75in said on 15/Jul/16
He's now listed at 6'3 on IMDB. That's in shoes definitley
Lenad 5ft9.75in said on 15/Jul/16
If Nicoles heels give her 4 inches, if hugh stood up straight, he'd look marginally taller. 187/188cm I'd put him in
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 13/Jul/16
I'm 187 CM with an inseam of 28 inches. Is that short for my height? My torso does seem very long.
AAAA said on 12/Jul/16
interesting article here from a costume designer who worked with Hugh Jackman for one of his one man plays. He seamstress says he has a 37 in inseam!?!?! Thats just absurd. I'm going to guess the avg 6'1-6'2 guy has a 33 or a 34. If this is true I can't imagine him being any less than 6'2 at his prime.

Rob, any info or stats on this kinda stuff? Most people I've met with 36+ inseams are 6'4 or greater. Not saying Jackman is or has ever been over his claimed 6'2, I think you've got his current listing spot on. I'm just curious. That kids leg to torso ratio reminds me of someone like a young Clint Eastwood.

Click Here
Editor Rob: maybe the seamstress got a little excited at the thought of running her tape up Jackman's legs...and put down the wrong number...
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Jul/16
Jackman in those shoes Id say is 190cm+
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 30/Jun/16
Hugh Jackman's hair adds an inch of height in that photo, but he does look taller than Nicole Kidman by about 2-3 CM still.
Alex said on 27/Jun/16
In that photo Kidman looks tall as Jackman with those heels, around 6 cm (179 + 6 cm of heel). 187 cm should be right for him.
Daniel Ross said on 27/Jun/16
He looked 6'2 in x-men days of future past next to 6'2.75 Nick Hoult
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Jun/16
Looks a good 2in taller even w/h the slouch
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 21/Jun/16
With 5'11 1/8" measured Marshawn Lynch:

Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Jun/16
Looks 188/189cm range in his earlier movies if anything...
Dejavu said on 9/Jun/16
He really looks 6'2 in his earlier movies
Alistair said on 31/May/16
Rob what do you think of this photo taken from a show in 1995?
Click Here
Editor Rob: it's interesting as there will be variables like 'what is he wearing' and how much height would the camera add to him.
Arch Stanton said on 28/May/16
I can definitely see how some of these celebs seem to lose height early on. If you consider how much wear and tear these actors go through in making action films, over time it's going to take its toll. I twinged my back recently and am having trouble recovering as when I'm in bed I seem to keep pulling it when I turn. Very sensitive things backs, so I can certainly see how people like Jackman could lose a bit of height in 40s.
Editor Rob: Jackman has done a lot of heavy lifting over 15 years...I don't think that has helped.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 17/May/16
187cm minimum today
Johno said on 14/May/16
Didn't look much taller than Jonathon Ross and knowing Ross's height, that is rather worrying, very worrying if he claims 6'2.
Mark said on 13/May/16
Jackman can still pull of 6'2" in the morning today.
Silent_D said on 7/May/16
I never doubted wolverine. 6 foot 2.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 5/May/16
You could argue 6ft1¾ today
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Apr/16
Looks a strong 6ft2/weak 6ft3 in his early 2000's movies.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 21/Apr/16
Not convinced he was anything less than 6ft2(188cm) 10-15 years ago.
Celebheights 6'1.75 said on 21/Apr/16
Rob, who appears to be taller in the photo to you with him Garrett Hedlund? Garrett Hedlund seems to be a bit taller than him in my opinion.
Editor Rob: there's quite a few photos and they look quite close, within the similar kind of range...I did notice at one premiere Garrett had a slightly thicker boot than the shoe hugh was in.
Celebheights 6'1.75 said on 18/Apr/16
By Garrett Hedlund:

Click Here

How come Garrett Hedlund is listed at 186 CM if Hugh Jackman is listed as 187 CM?
TJE said on 17/Apr/16
Rob, could he just be 6'1.75? I'm really not convinced he's lost anything and he also looks 8 cm taller than Russel Crowe.
Celebheights 6'1.75 said on 17/Apr/16
Garrett Hedlund (6'1 1/2") appears to be taller than him in every single photo of the two together.
Andrea said on 13/Apr/16
Lol Rob, how can you still believe 188 night is still possible for Hugh???
He did look at least an inch shorter than Brandon Routh and 5 inches shorter than Daniel Cudmore...
He has NEVER been 6'2 in his life, unless he started shrinking at 30, of course :)
Editor Rob: maybe Hugh could follow the G pattern...shrinking from 5ft 8 to 5ft 6.5 in mid 30's, then regrowing to 5ft 8 in 40's.

If he measured 187 in his 30's it certainly wouldn't be a huge surprise, although for the moment I feel he could pull off near enough 6ft 2.
AAAA said on 13/Apr/16
Found this interesting. Hugh next to Charles Barkely, and the Rock next to Charles Barkely. Based on where their eyes are hitting on Barkely's head, I would say Hugh looks to have the Rock (eyes are near mouth for both. Barkely's eyebrows are at the hairline/top of head for hugh, and clearly over the Rock)
Click Here
Click Here

Rock has better posture in this photo, but neither he or Charles are perfect.

Hugh is also in front of Charles at the White House pic.

Maybe it is all in the camera but I can't see the Rock having 1.5'' on Hugh if they were next to each other. If Hugh is 6'1.5 then the rock is looking 6'2-6'2.25 to me.
What do you think Rob?
Orca said on 13/Apr/16
People will be shorter when they are older. I think Hugh Jackman is 6ft2 (1m88) now and 10 years ago he is more than 6ft2 (1m89). I see him in X-Man Originals, he is really tall.
Orca said on 13/Apr/16
People will be shorter when they are older. I think Hugh Jackman is 6ft2 (1m88) now and 10 years ago he is more than 6ft2 (1m89). I see him in X-Man 2, he is really tall.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 13/Apr/16
I wouldn't have gone lower than C
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 11/Apr/16
Rob, where would you place Jackman at peak?

A) 191cm/189cm
B) 190.5cm/188.5cm
C) 190cm/188cm
D) 189.5cm/187.5cm
E) 189cm/187cm
Editor Rob: not above C, within C-D range.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Mar/16
James, yeah like in Swordfish where he looked near 6ft3
James B said on 28/Mar/16
Hugh always looks tall. Probably because he's fairly lean.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Mar/16
Or Andrea celebheightrolls.com which you can spew your worthless tirades on with Danimal...
Johno said on 23/Mar/16
To be fair, Luke Evans looked shorter next to Kellan Lutz and Henry Cavil than he did with Jonathon Ross and Hugh Jackman, something was not quite right there. I don't believe neither Ross or Jackman are shorter than Lutz or Cavil. Kellan looked around 5'11.75 - 6'0 with Rob.

Also Luke Evans just about looked an inch or so taller than Eric Roberts who looked no taller than 5'8 next to Rob. I don't believe Evans is above 5'10, he was not taller than Sir Ian Mackellan.

Hugh and Ross looked the same height but i am going to Push Hugh to 6'1 because i am confident Ross is on the lower of the 6'0-range.

Jonathan Ross 6'0.25
Hugh 6'1
Luke Evans, no taller then 5'10
Lutz 5'11.75, 6'0
Cavil 5'11.75, 6'0
Andrea said on 23/Mar/16
"Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Mar/16
187/188cm today, 188/189cm peak "
Agreed... Rob, if you plan to do a new site in the future called celebmorningheights.com, you should stick to Rampage's estimates because he's very good at it :)
Editor Rob: there's a niche for many aspects of height...

liftwearers.com would be an interesting one...I doubt many actors would be happy to be on that site!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Mar/16
187/188cm today, 188/189cm peak
Anonymous said on 19/Mar/16
Jonathan Ross show, 19th of March 2016. Luke Evans barely shorter than Hugh Jackman.
6ft 1 max for him.
Z187 said on 19/Mar/16
Was somehow shorter than Luke Evans on Jonathan Ross tonight.... Luke was taller than Ross aswell...
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Mar/16
6ft2-3 in the 1st X-Men movie, Swordfish, The Prestige and Van Helsing
amaterasu said on 15/Mar/16
Rob, how likely is 185-6 range for him ? I can agree with your listing, but he also look like a 6'1" flat guy a lot.
Editor Rob: if I was betting, I wouldn't put much money on it...if it was around 187cm I'd put a bigger bet on that.
Mr S said on 8/Mar/16
@ Rob: What do you think caused him to shrink in his 40's? He seems to be a fit, healthy man it's very odd that he has lost half an inch at 47. Considering that Stallone and Liam Neeson have only lost half an inch and they are in their 60's 1/2 inch at 47 seems strange.
Editor Rob: I think for 15 years Jackman has done a good amount of heavy lifting and it has taken it's toll by a centimetre.
Dejavu said on 6/Mar/16
He was an undisputed 6'2 in his prime.
Johno said on 2/Mar/16
Sometimes Rob, i reckon you get visted. I do hear passions flare on here. Hugh does not wear lifts in most events, maybe just for Wolverine. He don't need to wear lifts simply because he is taller then most stars; i can name quite a few who do at most times though.

6'1
AAAA said on 1/Mar/16
@ Grizz. The 1st photo was meant to show the heel. Not for a height comp. her posture is loose but so is his. Tinyurl was giving me issues. Can't post the link. Try googling it if you're curious. Lots of shots from that premier. There's another photo of them all standing straight relative to one another. He's clearing Jansen and Romain by an easy 2 inches of not more with a downward head tilt. I agree he is likely 6'1.5 now that rob has him listed at. I do think all the weight lifting has caused him to lose a half inch at 45. I misspoke before when I said minimum. I could see the argument being made for looking 6'1.5 in the same photos. It comes down to what would be hit standing military. my point was that if he was really only 6-6'.05 like some have been claiming he couldn't look that tall with an in sneaker height of 6'1. Jansen would have had to show up to the premiere barefoot and walk in a trench for this pic to work. She's listed here at 5'11.5. Unfortunately the only other pic I can find isn't full body.

Rob, can you make sure the address I post makes it I. Even if it isn't a link? Thanks. If anyone can find a full scale versio. Of this it would be great.


Click Here
grizz said on 29/Feb/16
@AAAA, he's the same height, if not a tiny bit shorter than Rebecca. It's just she didn't stand straight - hence the illusion.
AAAA said on 28/Feb/16
About 10 years ago
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

He's in what appears to be Converse slip ons. He's still taller than Romain and Jansen. Can't see Jansens footwear, but Romain is in a heel and is listed on this site at 5'11. He just looks too damn tall next to them in those shoes unless he was minimum 6'2. He lloks to have 2-3 inches on Jansen in the last photo.
184.3cm (Night) said on 26/Feb/16
6'1.5" sometimes looks closer to 6'1 because of less posture/footwear. Can look very near 6'2 at times.
AlexMahone said on 26/Feb/16
This lift wearer bull**** make me mad, really. All stars/actors/celebs are lift wearer. I wrote a long time ago on this board beacuse there are so many trolls here now. 6'0.25 for Jackman?? Pure bull****. Rampage has right, 187cm minimum.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Feb/16
Remember, Hugh is about 10 years older than Ryan. I think in his 30s he looked in the same range as Reynolds, Affleck or Bana (188-190cm).
grizz said on 24/Feb/16
I still think that interview wasn't serious.
Hugh answered that it was something to do with his character development or some story reason .
Which is ridiculous. Jackman's Wolverine looks nothing like comic book Wolverine. He's tall and slim while Wolverine is short and stocky.
For more genuine portrayal, he should've been more masculine, hunch a lot and do shootings with bare feet and not appear taller.

If true, however, that might make Jackman 6'1.75 peak and 6'1.25 now.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 23/Feb/16
187cm minimum. Still looks 6ft2 now
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Feb/16
6ft1 flat or less is a joke.
Candyman said on 22/Feb/16
Ryan said Jackman wore lifts to "appear taller than" not as tall as his costar, Ryan Reynolds.
Aaron Zamora said on 21/Feb/16
I think that it's time for a lower downgrade for Jackman. Maybe 6'0.5-6'1 after the interview between him and Ryan Reynolds.
Johno said on 19/Feb/16
I wonder who this certain co-star was in Ryan's visibly awkward question about lifts .......
Dejavu said on 18/Feb/16
He looked about the same with Ryan Reynolds
Gary said on 17/Feb/16
Click Here

Watch Ryan Reynolds interview Hugh Jackman. He looked about the same height because he was wearing lifts! Reynolds ribs him about it.

If Reynolds is 6'1 or 6'2 then Jackman MUST be shorter than 6'2, else why would have have to wear them on set?
Dejavu said on 17/Feb/16
He looked about the same with Ryan Reynolds
Gary said on 16/Feb/16
He was forced to wear lifts on "Wolverine" to appear as tall as Ryan Reynolds as confessed in an interview between the two of them.

I think Jackman is 6'0 or 6'1.
Dan said on 12/Feb/16
Look at this picture with Bradley Cooper (listed 6ft 0.5in) : Click Here

I honestly don't see more than 1.5 cm between them... So that would put Hugh Jackman at no more than 6' 1".
Johno said on 8/Feb/16
The reason why he stated that he was told to lie about his height and state 6'0 rather then a higher heigt, or his real height according to him, may have more got to so the fact that their might be earlier sources out there that state this height and might be closer to his real height rather trying to underplay his tall stature ---- height is always a good thing and i don't understand why he would feel to downgrade it, i don't believe would downgrade his height.
kurtz said on 4/Feb/16
6' 1''
185 cm.
186 cm. max
S.J.H said on 2/Feb/16
No johno. Bradley cooper look shorter than jackman at least 1.25" taller. I would rule out 3.5cm difference. Jackman could have fall as weak 6'2 but not under 6'1.5
Johno said on 27/Jan/16
In all fairness to Hugh, most layman over estimate thier heights ----- well men anyway; by 1.5 inches, i have seen this often thus, to keep in everything relative, i can see why he claims 6'2, that is because most people who don't pay much attention to height would state he is tall and 6'2 and similarily over-state their own respective heights. Bradley Cooper Rob has listed at 6'0.5 and Hugh Jackman strangely looks exactly the height as him.
Johno said on 22/Jan/16
Click Here


Click Here

With Sugar Ray Leonard who Rob has been pictured, Rob lists him at 5'9 but i don't see any height difference between Rob and Ray. Like Rob, Ray is between 5'8-5'8.5 and most importantly, Hugh obviously does not have 4-inches on him ---- try 3.5-inches.

If Sugar Ray is between 5'8 - 5'8.5, then Hugh looks between 5'11.5 - 6'0 in comparison to him and consistently does. Thus, these estimates of 6'1.75 or even above 6'1 look quite surprising.

As i said before, 6'1 is a decent estimate; certainly with any possible comparison to Rob, Hugh's height would drop even further.
joe## said on 19/Jan/16
peak 190 cm and 191 cm is impossible he would have this in 6'2.5-25
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 18/Jan/16
He might measure a little under 6ft2 today at worst but he's definitely not as low as 6ft1 flat. He easily looked in the same range as Ben Affleck 10-15 years ago.
Andrea said on 17/Jan/16
189 peak is not impossible... If you measured him one second out of bed of course! ;)
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Jan/16
/-_-(Today)-_-
Out of bed: 189-190cm
Before bed: 187-188cm

_-_(PEAK)_-_/
Out of bed: 190-191cm
Before bed: 188-189cm
Dejavu said on 10/Jan/16
He looks around 1.5 inches lower than Sacha Baron Cohen.

Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Borats chicken said on 8/Jan/16
rob, what would his dads height be? 177cm?
Editor Rob: he could have been near that range yeah.
Andrea said on 7/Jan/16
Sure...
Post me at least one picture where Hugh looks a big 6'2 then :)
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Jan/16
Yeah Andrea it's getting old.

@Willes190: yeah I think a weak 6ft2 at worst today and 10 years ago a strong 6ft2.
Johno said on 5/Jan/16
Does not fair well with Jake Gyllenhaal, who we know is ~ 5'10.5 as per recent measurement [ Tapes don't lie], the difference between is maximum 2 inches and probably a bit less. Therefore, 6'1 is a correct ceiling for him, he probably measures even less.
Andrea said on 3/Jan/16
O yeah, i am very insecure... Click Here :(
The difference between me and people like you is that i provide pictures, Willes! You're free to think whatever you want!
Look at him with David Beckham, Lebron James, this guy... He looks barely 6'1!
Has he shrunk? It's not impossible but again if you look at him with Brandon 10 years he "already" didn't look over 6'1.5...
Willes190 said on 1/Jan/16
Andrea, stop with all the downgrades, it's pretty obvious that you'r insecure
Andrea said on 30/Dec/15
This guy claims 6'3: Click Here
Hugh seems at least a couple inches shorter...
Editor Rob: he can look 6ft 1 with him.
Dan said on 24/Dec/15
This guy always looked so tall to me, even though he's only 6'2. It's probably because of his very long legs.
Willes190 said on 18/Dec/15
Hugh Jackman peak: 6'2.25
Hugh Jackman height: 6'1.75
Logan said on 17/Dec/15
Hey Rob, has he noticeably dropped that half inch you downgraded him to in his recent movies? Or is it an assumption based on his increasing age?
Editor Rob: to me, I think he has lost a bit of height from looking at him recently and 15 years ago.
AAAA said on 13/Dec/15
With Strahan
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

What does everyone think Strahan's height is? He still looks 6'2 to me if Strahan is 6'4.5-6'5. Maybe 6'1.75. I feel like 6'1.5 his low.
Slimguy said on 5/Dec/15
Morning:187.5
Night:185.5
Al said on 30/Nov/15
2 inches shorter than Chris Hemsworth. 6'1 for Hugh Jackman.
Dejavu said on 29/Nov/15
Standing tall he looks to have around 2 inches on Fallon
Chris said on 24/Nov/15
Rob, how come Hugh Jackman and Jimmy Fallon look about the same height here in this video?
Click Here
Editor Rob: I'm not sure I could see them as close in height there, for portion of that clip Jackman is dropping a bit of height at his hip.
James B said on 14/Nov/15
hugh jackman strikes me in some interviews i have seen him in as being over the top enthusiastic like Tom cruise. You know being overly smiley and friendly to the point where it seems quite threating. Except maybe tom cruise is more genuine about his beliefs and ideas etc..... My dad pointed out after watching jackman on Jonathan ross that he's a weird guy and I do agree.


Like i said in my last post with someone like Ewan Mcgregor his nice guy personality just seems more natural and 'real'. Hugh Jackman seems like he tries to hard to be very nice where it seems like an act.

I am quite suprised I am the only one who gets this vibe from Hugh but that's just me.
James B said on 12/Nov/15
Rob am I the only one who gets that impression hugh jackman seems like a bit of 'fake' nice guy who might be quick to turn if you did something to piss him of?

An actor like Ewan Mcgregor comes acros as being a genuinely nice laid back person. Hugh on the other hand seems quite excitable and fiery. It seems like he has a forced smile on his face a lot like a bit over the top.

He is a family man so I could be wrong.
Editor Rob: there's always spurilous rumours surrouding actors.

I've watched a fair amount of interviews with him over the years and he seems like a decent bloke...
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 12/Nov/15
"Hugh Jackman's height is 6ft 1⅞in (187.642cm)
"Peak height was 6ft 2⅛in (188.277cm)"

So that's about 0.5cm tops lost. 6ft2⅝(189.3cm) out of bed today and at peak 6ft2⅞(190.1cm)
the shredder said on 27/Oct/15
Rob , what would you guess his weight?
[Editor Rob: can vary from 190-210 range I feel]
Z187 said on 22/Oct/15
Measures up well against jeremy clarkson when he appears on top gear, so yeah full 6'2 I'd say
Dejavu said on 17/Oct/15
He looked a strong 6'2 but he could dip a bit under 6'2 today.
Willes190 said on 16/Oct/15
He looked a solid 189 in the first two X-Men movies
Dan said on 15/Oct/15
Rob, I think he has never been 6' 2". He hasn't been lifting very much weight and he's still young. In my opinion he didn't shrink and he has always been 6' 1.5". What do you say? Just like other guys said it before, he sometimes even struggles to look 6' 1"...
Sam said on 14/Oct/15
There's a lot of photos where Jackman looks 6'1.5" frankly, but he doesn't always stand his best, and near other 6'2" rangers like Ryan Reynolds or Ben Affleck he really doesn't look under 6'2" IMO.
Ray said on 13/Oct/15
I thought he was taller, but I think 6'1.5 is accurate after seeing the pic with him and Barkley.. Click Here
Grant said on 12/Oct/15
Is it safe to say that Ryan Reynolds is taller than him today?
Allie said on 11/Oct/15
I don't what you guys are talking about. I don't remember Famie wearing that big footwear. Wolverine has his big boots right that would make him like 6'3 range. While Famke in The Last Stand she spent several scenes wearing nothing!
James B said on 7/Oct/15
James marsden fisch
GP said on 7/Oct/15
Fisch, because he is not 6'2" that he claims, he was the lead in the movie and they were trying to hype his character to start up Wolverine movie chain and when he you are up against a female actress who is very tall, as Famke is and in heels, she would most likely edge him out. Those are the main reasons that he would wear lifts, because in movies is all about perception, go watch some John Wayne movies.
Dejavu said on 7/Oct/15
I thought Hugh Jackman edged out Garrett Hedlund
fisch said on 7/Oct/15
GP, why should they give him lifts for x-men, when wolverine is actually meant to be 5'4''. hugh was actually way too tall for the role.
It was James marsden, who played cyclops, who wore 2 inch lifts in the movie.
fisch said on 7/Oct/15
GP, why should they give him lifts for x-men, when wolverine is actually meant to be 5'4''. hugh was actually way too tall for the role.
It was James marsden, who played cyclops, who wore 2 inch lifts in the movie.
Max said on 6/Oct/15
Is 5'10" considered short now???? Or its just that Hugh Jackman is tall not average?
GP said on 2/Oct/15
Rob, how come you have him the same height at 187 as Dev Patel. Didn't Patel look about an inch taller in the movie and on the premiere? Makes me question his statement that he is 6'2". I always thought he was 185 with long arms and long legs that gave the impression that he was taller. And if I'm not wrong, they had him in lifts in x-men
[Editor Rob: they look very close to me, with possible slight advantage to Dev.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 12/Sep/15
He used to look taller than Reynolds.


Strong 6ft2 guy peak, no less.
Dejavu said on 6/Sep/15
He can look 6'1-6'2 these days but I think he is closer to 6'2. At times he could look the same as Ryan Reynolds.
ManKo said on 1/Sep/15
He didnt do that much of heavy lifting, and he is young. If guys like the rock dont have a peak hight (he lift way heavier than Hugh) or guys like Bill Kazmaier (world strongest man, now in his 60s, he doenst have a peak heigh either), Hugh shouldnt have one either.
Mat 5'10 said on 27/Aug/15
Rob, Who called Jackman 5'10? I think he was being a bit stupid with that quote. No one thinks Jackman is short.
[Editor Rob: I think he's making a general point about not getting upset over opinions, when you yourself know it's wildly incorrect.

Maybe he once encountered somebody who said 'Mate you're like 5ft 10?'...as much as the internet is full of trolling, real-life contains it's fair share too.
]
Matthew190 said on 21/Aug/15
Celebheights 6'1.75 said on 7/Aug/15
By 6'2" listed Kurt Warner:

Click Here

---

Hugh Jackman could've played Kurt Warner in a movie lol
Celebheights 6'1.75 said on 7/Aug/15
By 6'2" listed Kurt Warner:

Click Here
Celebheights 6'1.75"/187 CM said on 7/Aug/15
By Eli Manning (near the bottom):

Click Here
Andrea said on 1/Aug/15
Believing he's (still) near 6'2 would be much more insane! With Beckham he struggles to look 6'1, same thing with Lebron! Today he doesn't look much over 6'1, so it's up to you to believe whether he's shrunk and he was nearer 6'2 when "younger" or he's never been much over 6'1! :)
Also, Hugh is not your average joe... As Rob said, he spent many years lifting heavy weights so a small loss is possible. One thing, back in 2006, he already didn't look over 6'1.5 with Brandon Routh, so i doubt he's ever been 6'2, people like Lance Reddick who claims 6'2 too would be easily an inch taller than him!!!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 24/Jul/15
I think the downgrade is insane. Look at guys like Jason Statham, Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson. They're not gonna get downgrades anytime soon. He used to give a taller impression than Reynolds.
Johny said on 16/Jul/15
Click Here
With Reynolds
an anonymous peach said on 11/Jul/15
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover says on 25/Jun/15
I don't think a peak height is at all necessary.

"Hugh Jackman height: 6ft 2in (188cm)"
-----
He was no doubt 6'2" at his peak, but with all the heavy lifting he has done, it's pretty clear he has lost some height, he might not be as low as Rob lists him, maybe 6'1.75 is more reasonable?
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Jun/15
I don't think a peak height is at all necessary.

"Hugh Jackman height: 6ft 2in (188cm)"
Tarinator said on 25/Jun/15
6'1/5 is more of a minimum height. He's more 6'1.75 - 6'2.
Dejavu said on 20/Jun/15
He was taller than colin firth who is 6'1
Dejavu said on 11/Jun/15
I think he is closer to 6'1.75
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 9/Jun/15
Early 2000's he looked 188-189cm range at least (Swordfish, 1st X-Men movie, Kate & Leopold).
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 8/Jun/15
James B says on 5/Jun/15
170 pounds ain't all that skinny for 6'2 i mean look at James stewart.

I wonder rob 'naturally' is hugh jackman small framed?

It is light side. I think anywhere from 180-200lbs is the "ideal" weight range for 6ft2. But then again it is all about bone structure. Jackman pre-Wolverine was naturally lean whereas someone like John Goodman is naturally bulky
[Editor Rob: I suppose in a gym setting with other guys, they might see 170 as like quite skinny in comparison to other physiques you see at the gym.]
ManKo said on 6/Jun/15
I would like to see more studies about weightlifting and height loss. There are many strongmen, bodybuilders, westrlers, in their 60s that didnt lose height, while there are others that lost a lot (Arnold, Hulk Hogan, etc...).

Maybe some people are genetically more prono to lose height, maybe its related to steroids, or injures, maybe they were never that tall to begin with (many say Arnold was never more thasn 6´1), etc...

I can say that im a powerlifter, I deadlift regularly about 400 pounds, and when I train in the morning, It gets me to my lowest posible height. However, I always recover my maximun the next morning, after i wake up. the dats I dont lift, I lose height slowly during the day, not ad fast as the days that I deadlift/squat.
James B said on 5/Jun/15
170 pounds ain't all that skinny for 6'2 i mean look at James stewart.

I wonder rob 'naturally' is hugh jackman small framed?
James B said on 3/Jun/15
Rob can you add this quote from a mens fitness article


“I weighed 170 pounds, I was 6'2", and I was just skin and bones,” he says of his early 20s. “The guys in the locker room used to go, ‘Hey, Skinny! Hey, Ana!’—they used to call me Ana, for anorexic—and I’d go, ‘You tell me a practical application of a 350-pound press, and I’ll do it!’”
[Editor Rob: there's probably enough quotes, but I'll mention how he weighed 170 pounds as he says in early 20's.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/May/15
I still think 187cm is too low.
Yaspaa said on 25/May/15
Bill Kazmaier has put his body through way more punishment than your usual bodybuilder or actor who lifts and he's lost little to no height in his 60s. You do it right, you'll be fine. I don't see how you can tell 0.25" anyway. Hugh doesn't lift that heavy either, he still looks good in a suit.
Judd said on 22/May/15
as i said before, i have a lot of perplexities regarding his shrinkage...
IMO he ever been and still is today a 187 cms guy, so 6'1.75" as a unique height is fine.
Willes190cm said on 13/May/15
He looked 6'2.5 before, nowadays i THINK he's 6'1.75
Stronggamedude13 said on 3/May/15
Hugh Jackman is 6'2 1/2
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/May/15
188-189cm in the 1st X-Men movie
Dejavu said on 15/Apr/15
He was a solid 6'2.
james said on 14/Apr/15
How could he loss a half inch and he's only 47? He's still a solid 6'2
James B said on 9/Apr/15
I thought when he made an appearence on WWE raw last year he looked 6'2
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 8/Apr/15
If anything, his training has probably helped him maintain his height.
[Editor Rob: I wouldn't say that, from all I've read (and this is in actual medical research) I think the risks are increased significantly.

From one paper:

"When comparing lumbar magnetic resonance images of 24 runners, 26 soccer players, 19 weight lifters, and 25 shooters, disc degeneration and bulging were most common among weight lifters; soccer players had similar changes in the L4-S1 discs"

"Maximal weight lifting was associated with greater degeneration throughout the entire lumbar spine, and soccer with degeneration in the lower lumbar region. No signs of accelerated disc degeneration were found in competitive runners".

I personally wouldn't recommend those who value height and back health to be lifting really heavy in their late 30's and 40's. Also I strongly recommend anybody who smokes to try quitting the habit as it is associated with increased risks of degeneration.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Apr/15
Personally, I don't think he's lost any height at all. We don't know what's going on shoe-wise between those two. To me, he's a real 6ft2 guy who doesn't see the need to wear big shoes at events unlike Ryan Reynolds who I think may have some complex. It's my opinion

I do believe Liev is taller though
Judd said on 4/Apr/15
Rampage, no doubt that in that picture he does look even taller than a flat 6'2", however we don't know what kind of shoes the actors wear...
I think Liev Schreiber is at least 6'2.5" (with a good chance of being 6'2.75"), but from what we know it's also possible that Liev wore classical dress shoes while Jackman (being dressed like Luois XIV) a typical XVII century shoes like these: Click Here

from that picture, with similar shoes, Jackman does look a strong 6'3 (even 6'3.5"), but i still think that he was at peak 6'1.75" (or a flat 187 cms guy) and today has lost a really small fraction (less that 1/4 of inche IMO), considering his current age.
Nils said on 28/Mar/15
6'2 in shoes
Andrea said on 27/Mar/15
"Rampage(-_-_-)Clover says on 26/Mar/15
Click Here

Here's a little something for you guys who think Jackman was always under 6ft2 "
Wow, i didn't see that picture before! Now i can definitely buy a "peak" Hugh at 6'2 or maybe even a fraction over... Huge guy!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 26/Mar/15
Click Here

Here's a little something for you guys who think Jackman was always under 6ft2
berta said on 24/Mar/15
he was and still is 188 ore was ore still is 187 but on jimmy fallon he looks to be about 3 cm shorter than 191 hemsworth
Yaspaa said on 22/Mar/15
He only started getting bigger for the Wolverine part where he had special trainers. His musculature fluctuates between roles. There are former world strongest men competitors far older than him with no to little height loss. He's fit and healthy with a strong body that promotes height, he shouldn't be losing height until his 70s barring injury or illness.
cole said on 20/Mar/15
@berta: Not long ago he posted a video where he deadlifted nearly 400lbs: Click Here If that's not heavy lifting, I don't know what is. Deadlifts are especially hard on your back, and that's something he has done all his muscle building life, so it's bound to take it's toll when approaching 50. Either way, to get the amount of muscle mass he has had over the years, I assure you heavy lifting is quite required.
Click Here
184.3cm said on 19/Mar/15
Joe193cm Do you mean an inch? Its not like Hugh has short hair either. I agree with Andrea, i was actually being generous because of his posture but he really looks max 6'1.5 there.
joe 193cm night said on 18/Mar/15
Rob, the faith of her hair Brandon pulse 1cm or more
Andrea said on 17/Mar/15
Yeah, 184.3... And i'd add he looks MAX 6'1.5 next to Brandon Routh! He does look an easy inch taller! I guess 187 is not totally impossible for a "peak" Hugh but 188 is, IMO!
berta said on 17/Mar/15
he cant have lost height at 46 he is a guy that is ripped not a weightlifter. its not heavy weight he lift. the weights he lift is just healty and probably just do the oposit from losing height. he will start lose height in 10-12 years maybe
184.3cm said on 17/Mar/15
He looks 6'1.5 with Brandon Routh..
James B said on 17/Mar/15
Any guesses on shane richies height rob?

here with 6'2 Hugh Jackman
Click Here
[Editor Rob: richie can look anywhere in 5ft 11-6ft range, I think his agency height was 6ft.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Mar/15
He looked 189-190cm in Swordfish
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Mar/15
Wow! I'd love to have seen the type talk fanboy garbage circulating his page back then.
joe 193cm night said on 15/Mar/15
look at the last images of him with Baradon the brandan of hair you the advantage of 1cm Hugh was 6'2 legitimateClick Here
Andrea said on 14/Mar/15
Well, i guess Rob used to list people in shoes then! You had G at 5'8, Brad at 6', Hugh at 6'2.5... Then he thought it was better to give barefoot heights! :)
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 13/Mar/15
But, Rob you never had Pitt here at 6ft....or did you? Maybe over time you're opinion of Ryan Reynolds will change. I personally don't believe Jackman has lost height but I respect your opinions. Maybe in a few years you'll change your tune about Ryan Reynolds and believe that all along he wore bigger shoes than Hugh.

@Andrea, notice the brackets. I'm referring to the fact that once upon a time Hugh Jackman was listed here at 189cm and people would laugh at likes of you
[Editor Rob: Pitt I'm certain was 6ft for a period back in the early days.
Of course opinions/estimates can change. With an ever increasing amount of pages on the site, it can become harder over time to keep track. Sometimes it's just small adjustments here and there, better 'fits' if you understand.

It's always worth remembering though that changing a guess still doesn't change what a person gets measured at. We might assume the updated listing is nearer to what we think they measure, but none of us without measuring can say, it's a probable/best guess scenario. That's why meeting actors and using them as references can help with the ongoing celebrity height puzzles.]
slothee said on 12/Mar/15
At age 46 he's lost half an inch?! That seems a bit much height to lose at his age.
[Editor Rob: could be worse, there's a well known Bigfoot Anthropologist who lost 1.3 inches by age 40!

He then got hold of a special potion called 'Yetiurina' which made him taller again!]
Andrea said on 12/Mar/15
Lol, 189 at least? Unless Brandon Routh is 6'3.5 it's hard to believe he "was" 6'2.5, even 10 years ago! The only way he could have been 189 is in shoes!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 11/Mar/15
[Editor Rob: harder to say, but you couldn't rule out a tad shy of 6ft 2 10 years ago]

You definitely weren't saying that 10 years ago...during the "189cm at least" days of Jackman when no one was arguing 6ft2 and below but instead arguing 6ft3!
[Editor Rob: I think in 2004 I could believe Brad pitt as 6ft, but a lot of opinions change over time.]
TJE said on 11/Mar/15
He was always and still is 6'1.75.
Andrea said on 11/Mar/15
"Rampage(-_-_-)Clover says on 10/Mar/15
Early 2000's he looked 6ft2-3"
Rob's listings are not in shoes, but barefoot :)
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 10/Mar/15
Early 2000's he looked 6ft2-3
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 10/Mar/15
He's only 47!

I'd have waited a bit.
Jonas said on 10/Mar/15
I don't see 8 centimeters difference between hugh jackman (listed here at 6'2") and david beckham (5'11"), even considering that hugh jackman is at a worse posture that david beckham

Click Here

Either one of them is not listed correctly
184.3cm said on 9/Mar/15
6'1.5 is good for Hugh although i think maybe even a fraction less but small fraction nothing big. Beckham was measured at 5'10.5 during his run in the Man U youth team so it is possible he grew a bit since he was only 17 years old but 5'11 flat is really max i would give him. Just like his own claim.
vince somerhalder said on 9/Mar/15
hugh jackman is a legit 6'2. Patel is slightly shorter
Arch Stanton said on 8/Mar/15
5'11 RANGE means anything between 5'11 and 6 ft Lorne!! 182 is 5'11 range!
Jacob said on 8/Mar/15
Never really struck me as a full 6'2" guy, even in his prime. Always seemed 187-186 to me. Does anyone have any good photos proving he was once a legit 6'2"?
Tommo said on 8/Mar/15
Video of him next to Jimmy Fallon and Chris Hemsworth on youtube, looks about this next to Hemsworth.
Andrea said on 8/Mar/15
Well, Arch, i meant 5'11 flat... I think 5'11 is a good listing for Beckham, but i wouldn't go over! Just look at him next to MEASURED Zlatan Ibrahimovic, he actually can look shorter than 5'11 in some photos with him...
Dejavu said on 7/Mar/15
He looked at least the same next to Patel. Maybe he is a bit under 6'2 today but there is without a doubt that he was a legit 6'2.
Lorne said on 7/Mar/15
I hate to nitpick, but 5'11 range is 180-181. 182 is closer to 6 feet. I would consider 182 weak 6ft range, like Steve Martin or maybe Jensen, than I would ever use to describe BP!
Kourosh said on 7/Mar/15
hes only 46 years old. Its impossible to lose 1 cm at this age. Hes way freaking too young for listing height pick or shrinking.

Hes still 6'2.
Arch Stanton said on 6/Mar/15
Andrea says on 1/Mar/15
Lol, Beckham has never looked 182, Arch! If anything, he can look just 5'10 at times next to Zlatan Ibrahimovic... But 5'11 range is what he generally looks! Just don't try to upgrade the others to support a 6'2 listing for Hugh :)

182 is 5'11 range!!
Lorne??? said on 4/Mar/15
I could buy Patel at 6'2, but remember that he has excellent posture, while Daniels has gotten loader over the years. I still think Faniels could pull out a little extra on a stadiometer.
Bishop said on 4/Mar/15
Tbh, I don't think he's lost any height. He's in his what late 40s? Maybe he lost a small fraction but he always looked a weak 6'2" to me....
Shamrock said on 4/Mar/15
Lol 5'10.5? Dev Patel 6'0?

Click Here

Also, that camera angle favours Patel and he's standing straighter than Jackman.
Silent_D said on 4/Mar/15
Solid 6 foot 2 nut he didn't look much taller than 182cm neil patrick harris and beckham.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Mar/15
Celebheights 6'1.5"-6'2" says on 3/Mar/15
I agree with the downgrade. However, I would also upgrade Dev Patel to a full 6'2". He's clearly not shorter than Jeff Daniels here:

That I can agree on
high and low said on 3/Mar/15
Click Here

No more than 5'10.5 next to dev patel who I believe is six foot barefoot, but looks taller because he's skinny.
Judd said on 3/Mar/15
Rob, i agree that he's 6'1.5" today but he's 47 years old! He's not even in his 50's!
How can we talk about "peak height"?
Any chance he was never taller than 6'1.75"?
Andrea said on 3/Mar/15
Rob, you think he already lost height in 2006? He didn't look over 6'1.5 next to Brandon Routh... Now he looks not much over 6'1 flat! 187 on a good day is possible, though, certainly not what you'd call a big 6'2 guy!
[Editor Rob: harder to say, but you couldn't rule out a tad shy of 6ft 2 10 years ago.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Mar/15
That's not entirely true
Celebheights 6'1.5"-6'2" said on 3/Mar/15
I agree with the downgrade. However, I would also upgrade Dev Patel to a full 6'2". He's clearly not shorter than Jeff Daniels here:

Click Here
Judd said on 2/Mar/15
rob you think HJ might be 6'1.75" (or even 6'1.5")? Look at him with Bradley Cooper (6'0.5"):

Click Here
Click Here
[Editor Rob: from all I've seen I think around 6ft 1.5 last 2 years is more likely.]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 1/Mar/15
Oh come on! Just because he does some heavy lifting doesn't mean anything
[Editor Rob: prolonged and repetitive heavy lifting, either through weight or job related will put excessive stresses on the spinal structure, leading to far greater chance of damage.

There's enough for me to see him as having lost height compared to early 30's.]
Andrea said on 1/Mar/15
Lol, Beckham has never looked 182, Arch! If anything, he can look just 5'10 at times next to Zlatan Ibrahimovic... But 5'11 range is what he generally looks! Just don't try to upgrade the others to support a 6'2 listing for Hugh :)
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/15
He's looking good on the Graham Norton show though, he's been looking pretty ill/rough the last few years but looks to be back to his handsome best at the moment aside from looking a bit shorter!
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/15
Beckham can pull off looking 182 at times though...
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/15
He definitely looks shorter to me than he did 10-15 years ago. At times he could even look like 189 but now he consistently looks in 6'1" range to me. He's had a fair few health problems, and as you say with all the wear and tear of training and roles not impossible he's already lost a bit.
[Editor Rob: the fella has played that Wolverine role in numerous movies. I think when you are lifting big weights consistantly Like Him in your late 30's and early 40's, the discs are under a lot of intensive loading stresses.

He's still managing 400 pound dead lifts at 46 which is good going!
]
Lorne said on 28/Feb/15
Half inch t 46 seems a bit incredulous... A fraction is certainly possible, but he seems to be in pretty good shape, to say the least.

I'll go 187cm peak, maybe a fraction less now.
Andrea said on 27/Feb/15
In the first picture he looks around an inch taller than Beckham, in the second one 1.5 inches, maybe 2 if Hugh stood "straight"... And this is not a surprise at all, this is just a realization (like when Rob met big G) that Hugh is noway near 6'2! 6'1.5 is the most i'd argue today and i wouldn't be surprised at all if he was closer to 6'1 flat! He's 46 today, so yeah, he might have lost a fraction due to his intensive trainings, but i doubt it's more than a cm! He's never been 6'2, he already looked not over 6'1.5 10 years ago next to Brandon Routh, so the listing should be more 6'1.5, maybe 6'1.75 on a good day at peak and 6'1-6'1.25 today! But Rob always tries to be conservative so he goes with "6'2 peak"...
184.3cm said on 27/Feb/15
Looks more this nowadays. Certainly next to Affleck didnt look more than 6'1.5 if Ben is 6'2 like many claim.
Arch Stanton said on 27/Feb/15
Rob did you see the pics with Beckham? Click Here Something doesn't look right! Difficult to see 8 cm between them! It is time for a downgrade for Hugh? He's been looking 6'1" range a lot in recent times.
[Editor Rob: I don't know how great Hugh stands at times, but 6ft 1.5 today seems more likelier. I think although now late 40's, his roles, especially the training for playing his wolverine character, might have at least started to take a fraction off him.]
James said on 26/Feb/15
He looked 6'2-6'3 range compared to john travolta in swordfish
Rusty 190cm said on 23/Feb/15
I used to see 6'3" listings for this guy early in early 2000s
Donna said on 22/Feb/15
I will say that I met Hugh Jackman a few times when he did theater, and I immediately thought, "Wow, he's tall!" I'm short - around 5'6" and was wearing heels and in the pictures he took with me, he definitely looked at least half a foot taller, probably more. Maybe 8 inches taller. I think 6'2" seems accurate - in fact, I'd argue that in person he looked taller than that. He just has a natural tendency to bend his head and legs slightly to look shorter because he seems a little embarrassed by his height. I definitely noticed this in person.
Donna said on 22/Feb/15
Why are people really debating what height Hugh Jackman is? Is it that important. I will say that I met him a few times when he did theater, and I immediately thought, "Wow, he's tall!" I'm short - around 5'6" and in the pictures he took with me, he definitely looked at least half a foot taller, probably more. I think 6'2" seems accurate - in fact, I'd argue that in person he looked taller than that. He just has a natural tendency to bend his head and legs slightly to look shorter because he seems a little embarrassed by his height. I definitely noticed this in person.
Andrea said on 21/Feb/15
Well, there's some tilt in that photo which favours Beckham a little... But, yeah, Hugh is 2 inches taller at most which actually is not a surprise at all! The more i see him the more he can look 6'1-6'1.5! Always a chance he's lost a cm (at worst) so maybe he could have been 6'1.5-6'1.75 when younger and more 6'1-6'1.5 now! 6'2 is a very optimistic listing!
Tom said on 19/Feb/15
Anyone care to explain this. 2 inches max between Hugh and Beckham just look at the eye levels and Becks is leaning more.

Click Here
Bishop said on 19/Feb/15
With David Beckham:
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 17/Feb/15
I see it the other way around. Jackman wears smaller heeled shoes and may appear shorter while Reynolds will go for the bigger heels.
Celebheights 6'1.5"-6'2" said on 16/Feb/15
Ryan Reynolds: 6'2.25" (he's 1 inch shorter than Snoop Dogg, but one could use Jeff Daniels as a case of him not being that much past 6'2" since Jeff Daniels did have half an inch on him)
Hugh Jackman: 6'1.75" (he's shorter than Ryan Reynolds, and he's exactly the same as Adrian Peterson who was measured at 6'1.5" at the combine. He strikes me as being the same as Tom Hiddleston, who you have as 6'1.75"). Ryan Reynolds is slouching in the photos where he appears taller.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 10/Feb/15
This guy is probably near 6ft3 out of bed
joe 193cm night said on 10/Feb/15
peak 6'2 (188)
Andrea said on 10/Feb/15
Yeah, a small lost is not totally impossible for a guy like him, but we're talking about what, Rob? Half an inch? Maybe a quarter inch? And when do you think he "started" losing height? You can see him at only 38 next to Brandon Routh and he already didn't look over 6'1.5 there... So, he's what today? 6'1-6'1.25?
[Editor Rob: in last 5 years a fraction. Of course he could have been a little under 6ft 2, not everyone will fall bang on equal inches, for every guy who does there's one who will be on the 3/4 or 1/4 or 1/2.]
grizz said on 5/Feb/15
Rob, I think it's time to downgrade him to 187. He sure was a full 6ft2 guy,but not anymore. Seeing him with Fallon made that all much easier to conclude.
[Editor Rob: it is a possibility, even though 46 years old, I think his physical roles and what I'd say was excessive lifting could have potentially contributed a cm loss.]
Penguinboy25 said on 5/Feb/15
Just so you know not everyone shrinks the same amount daily.
Andrea said on 31/Jan/15
Well, 6'1.5 morning is a bit hard to believe because that would put him under 6'1 at his low. At the same time, 6'2 seems a stretch for sure, after seeing him with many people. I could buy 6'1.5, maybe 6'1.75 on a very very good day...

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.