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

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

Add a Comment 250 comments

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 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, 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... 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.

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
Out of bed: 189-190cm
Before bed: 187-188cm

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
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
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?' 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...
Arch Stanton said on 31/Jan/15
6'1.5 morning? I'd say it's a safe bet he clears 6'2" out of bed. Cohen for me is taller than a flat 6'3".
Judd said on 31/Jan/15
No penguin, I do not agree! 6'0.75-1" (so likely 6'1.5" in the morning is quite unbelievable)...
Jackman has (averagely) 2" on Famke Janssen, who I am sure is a bit taller than a flat 5'11"...
Rob has listed famke at 5'11.5" (so in the 181,2-181,6 cms range) but personally I think she's a flat 182 cms girl (so in the 181,8-182,2 cms range) and 5'11.75" would be her perfect listing!
In this case Jackman is in the 187's zone, so 6'1.5-1.75" is fair!
I don't buy anything under 6'1.5" for him!
penguinboy25 said on 30/Jan/15
No way is he 6'2. Looks significant shorter than Sacha Baron cohen and Cohen is leaning in to lose height in the pictures. I bet this guy is 6'1.5 best in the morning.
Andrea said on 12/Jan/15
So, Hugh is basically 6'2 in shoes in the picture above... You think Hugh had already lost a cm back in 2006 when he met Brandon Routh? Almost 10 years ago he already looked nothing over 6'1.5 with Brandon...
Andrea said on 11/Jan/15
Rob, how tall do you think Nicole is in the heels she's wearing in the photo above? She looks basically as tall as Hugh! Hugh must be at least 6'3 with shoes (since he IS a big 6'2), so she's what? 6'2-6'3?
[Editor Rob:
I believe she'd measure close to 184cm in those basic heels, but she is at Hugh's hairline at most, so that would be 1.5 inches less. Her own hairstyle looks close to an inch in fact.

And I'm still open to the possibility Hugh has lost a cm in last 10 years through excessive lifting and wear and tear. Similarly with Rock.
Tymmo said on 11/Jan/15
he looks 6'1''½ to me
cole said on 10/Jan/15
@Rampage: Well for one Jackman, Reynolds and the others are wearing boots and is closer to the camera in a lot of them, one is shot from a lower point as well, Liev is wearing converse type footwear. They are also standing on asphalt, which can be uneven. I don't think Jackman would lose much more than Crowe in my pic.
trav said on 8/Jan/15
Nah he 6'2-6'3 no way Hugh is 5'10 whoever said that is ridiculous
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 7/Jan/15
The angles are fine! Stop trying to muddy the waters.

BTW, Jackman is easily dropping height in that photo
cole said on 5/Jan/15
@Rampage: Terrible angle on a lot of those though. Better to use something like this: Click Here where he looks about 3 inches taller than 5'10.5 (at best) Russell Crowe.
Judd said on 4/Jan/15
I think he's 6'1.5-1.75": a bit shorter than a flat 6'2" Ben Affleck and as tall as Danny Huston
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 1/Jan/15
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

In some of those he has 1in+ on Reynolds and Schrieber
Joe said on 31/Dec/14
Hugh is definitely 6'2", in Swordfish, he has two inches on John Travolta. He is allegedly around 215 pounds. Just looking at him, I honestly thought he was better suited to portray Batman than Wolverine, but his Prestige co-star Christian Bale who is 6'0" nailed the character perfectly.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Dec/14
Dejavu says on 10/Dec/14
He looked close to having 3 inches on Travolta

Yeah and in 2001 Travolta was probably still at least 6ft
Dejavu said on 10/Dec/14
He looked close to having 3 inches on Travolta.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 10/Dec/14
Looked a clear 6ft2-6ft3 in X-Men (2000), Swordfish and The Prestige.
trav said on 8/Dec/14
Why would someone said that Hugh is 5'10 that bull**** no way he he's 6'2-6'3
the shredder said on 8/Dec/14
We really only get mad when there's an element of truth, right?"

G ?
Andrea said on 7/Dec/14
Brandon Routh's pics are from 2006, Hugh was only 38 at that time... And he looks 6'1.5 tops!!!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 6/Dec/14
1st X-Men movie and Swordfish he could look 6ft2+
Mike said on 6/Dec/14
He was also treated for skin cancer on the nose again i'm glad he's ok!
Mike said on 6/Dec/14
I wonder if Hugh lost a fraction? In his early movies he could look a strong 6ft 2... Nowadays not so much.
[Editor Rob: this is what I'm wondering, has he lost anything through the last 10 years.]
cole said on 2/Dec/14
@Editor Rob: What's the hold-up on the downgrade?
Andrea said on 1/Dec/14
There are other pics of Brandon and Hugh and there is AT LEAST an inch between them! And what about Lebron James? He's a MEASURED 6'7.25 guy and is way taller than him, he looks a weak 6'1 with him at most! Hugh is simply not a legit 6'2, that's all!
andrew height said on 30/Nov/14
he looked like 185 in Prisoners next to actors like Jake Gyllengal and Paul Dano
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Nov/14
He looks maybe a weak 6ft2 opposite Routh but he's bending his neck forward while Routh is upright...
joe said on 29/Nov/14
surely 6'1 (185-186)
Arch Stanton said on 22/Nov/14
Rob can you see 6'2" here with Routh? Click Here
[Editor Rob: maybe 6ft 1.5 range there]
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 17/Nov/14
I still think he can look up to 6ft2½ in pictures.
Andrea said on 6/Nov/14
Arch, you've seen him with measured 6'7.25 Lebron James? Or with Brandon Routh? Do you honestly think he's 6'2 with them? Come on!
Dejavu said on 5/Nov/14
He looked 2 inches taller than Christian Bale. He had an inch over Michael Caine and Kevin Costner. I think he is a legit 6'2. Lowest you can argue is 6'1.75 but nothing under.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Nov/14
Dejauvu, in The Prestige, yeah?

Jackman also cleared Bale by 2in.
Dejavu said on 3/Nov/14
He is 6'2. He had a clear inch on 6'1 Michael Caine.
Arch Stanton said on 2/Nov/14
Prince William Andrea is close to a proper 6'3" and he was barely taller than Kidman in heels too!
Arch Stanton said on 2/Nov/14
Andrea says on 3/Oct/14
Arch, you got an idea of how tall a real 189 guy is? Brandon Routh is the perfect example of a big 189 guy and, btw, he looks at least an inch taller than Hugh... Have you seen him with a Lebron James? He does look under Lebron's nose, he doesn't even look 6'1 with him... Or if you are lazy, just look at the pic above: Nicole Kidman is no more than 6'1 in those small heels and Hugh looks barely taller, like around 6'2 in shoes! 6'2 is quite generous, IMO!
[Editor Rob: it is true that a weak 6ft 2 for Hugh might be a better shout, probably in the same range as Fox, they have held a 6ft 2 flat since the beginning of time here though!

but speaking of 189cm, I saw today again the 6ft 2.25 height challenger and he was standing in same footwear with me/jenny and he did seem a good example of reminding me a strong 6ft 2 from my eyes...]

He had an easy inch on Ross, but in thinking about it at the time I was basing it on Ross being 6'1.5 but he's now at 185 and some even claim he's 184. I still can't see him under 6'2" with Ross and he edges out Michael Caine, but I agree he can look 6'1" range a lot.
Arch Stanton said on 2/Nov/14
He edged out Michael Caine I thought.
Arch Stanton said on 2/Nov/14
Looks a proper 6'2" in The Prestige. Man, the way Scarlett Johansson looks at him in that film, that would be every man's dream!!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 28/Oct/14
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

Practically nothing there between them
1.79 cm guy said on 27/Oct/14
One of the few guys who doesnt lie about his height. he always looks close to 6'3'' even in regular shoes. so he really is 6'2'' and he looks it. just look at how long his legs or upper body.
Silent_D said on 27/Oct/14
Solid 6 foot 2 guy.
mike said on 22/Oct/14
You really need to downgrade him to at least 6ft 1.75 Rob.
Judd said on 17/Oct/14
6'1.5" is spot on next to Ben Affleck (6'2")
Andrea said on 17/Oct/14
Take away the fact that footwear and ground are unknown, but saying he looks 6'1 or even 6'1.5, well this is not being objective! That'h how you look with 6'3 guys on here (and maybe more)...
Andrea said on 16/Oct/14
There's more difference between Hugh and Lebron than between you and Zach Levi (and that's supposed to be a 7 inch difference)...
Click Here
Plus Lebron is leaning a bit, if you trace a line you can see he's well Lebron's nose. If that's only 6 inches difference, how much you think Lebron measures from the top of the head to the nose? 5-5.5 inches range?
cole said on 16/Oct/14
He looked the same height as 6'1.25 Adrian Peterson. He could be 6'1.5, but even 6'1.75 seems generous.
Just please take him down from 6'2, he's been listed that for far too long...
Andrea said on 14/Oct/14
I asked to be honest... He's much nearer the camera and still looks under his nose... I don't know how he can possibly look even 6'1.5 with him! It looks like he'd "be" 6', if he didn't have all that camera advantage! Of course i'm not saying he's that low but if he doesn't even look 6'1 with him! Lebron dwarfs him!!!
[Editor Rob: the difference I'd say was around 6 inches, but we have 2 big unknowns to really say anything with certainty - footwear and what type of ground they are on.]
Andrea said on 13/Oct/14
Rob, how tall does he look with Lebron James? Be honest...
[Editor Rob: I'd guess him in the 6ft 1-1.5 range with big lebron, although I don't know if they have similar footwear.]
Jake: 1.84 m- 1.85 m said on 12/Oct/14
6ft 1.75in is spot on.
Andrea said on 11/Oct/14
Nothing, another guy who wont change just because he says 6'2...
Andrea said on 11/Oct/14
Rob, not a chance he's as tall as Lance Reddick, this guy is probably not over 6'1.5... Even 6'1.75 is still generous...
Andrea said on 10/Oct/14
Come on, Rob. Downgrade him to 6'1.5, he's not 6'2 and you know...
[Editor Rob: 6ft 1.75 is probably the best shout for him.]
184.3cm said on 5/Oct/14
Probably is rounding up a small fraction. I always saw him as a 187cm guy.
mike said on 5/Oct/14
6ft 2 is not a terrible listening but i don't agree he's over it maybe in the morning though.
187 night
189 morning
Andrea said on 4/Oct/14
Well, Rob, would you bet on him being taller than the plumber guy? I wouldn't at all and i probably would bet on the plumber, to be fair... And remember he's 186.6!
[Editor Rob: he might be similar]
jtm said on 3/Oct/14
i don't understand how charles barkely at 6'6 and jackman at 6'1 range is possible. barkely has a posture and footwear advantage and he still doesn't look over 4 inches taller than jackman.
Andrea said on 3/Oct/14
Arch, you got an idea of how tall a real 189 guy is? Brandon Routh is the perfect example of a big 189 guy and, btw, he looks at least an inch taller than Hugh... Have you seen him with a Lebron James? He does look under Lebron's nose, he doesn't even look 6'1 with him... Or if you are lazy, just look at the pic above: Nicole Kidman is no more than 6'1 in those small heels and Hugh looks barely taller, like around 6'2 in shoes! 6'2 is quite generous, IMO!
[Editor Rob: it is true that a weak 6ft 2 for Hugh might be a better shout, probably in the same range as Fox, they have held a 6ft 2 flat since the beginning of time here though!

but speaking of 189cm, I saw today again the 6ft 2.25 height challenger and he was standing in same footwear with me/jenny and he did seem a good example of reminding me a strong 6ft 2 from my eyes...]
Arch Stanton said on 3/Oct/14
Jackman did look 189 actually with Jonathan Ross. But I agree that often he looks a bit under 6'2" like he does with Russell Crowe.

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.