|
Anonymous says on 4/Jul/08
Jay s. Wrong again. How tall was the kid? I have a friend of mine who was 6'2 in the 4th grade. Again you NEVER met him. I KNOW people who met him. I talked to some one a couple of years ago who works in Tombstone. I asked her if John Wayne ever came to town. She said he came to town a few times over the years.
I asked her how Tall she thought he was. She said he was no less than 6'3 and a VERY BIG man. Also camera angles come into play as well. It is possible he was 6'3 Prime and 6'2 at the end but again never below 6'2. If what you say is true, he had to have worne EIGHT INCH Lifts. I also asked some workers about Waynes height who worked in OLD Tucson Studios in AZ. Most of them were not working there years ago but a talked to a couple who did. They Both said at least 6'3. the one guy said Waynes Boots were normal NO Lifts. And Jay never explains Why do people like Tom Selleck and Robert Mitchum say Wayne was 6'4?
Rob. What do you and Glenn think? Jay S. says on 4/Jul/08
Here's the 'smoking gun' picture of John Wayne the night he placed his feet in cement at Grauman's Chinese Theater. Take note of the hat he wore to make him appear taller and the little child waiting for an autograph who comes to his shoulder. Click Here
Anonymous says on 4/Jul/08
Jay S you are WRONG. I have a friend who is 6'3 with size 11 feet and shorter legs. You never met him nor do you know anyone who has. Jay S. says on 4/Jul/08
As difficult as it is to believe, Wayne's fistprint in the cement is small and proportional to a man of 5'8". patrick says on 4/Jul/08
Frankly, some comments have lately become much too phony. This is a serious and clever site which deserves serious reflection. As for small John Wayne's feet", it is quite known; he reportedly was "11". On the other hand, his hands were huge. The Graumann's theatre's prints are often deceptive, depending how hard the personalities push feet or hands into the fresh cement.
As I already wrote it here, I was also surprised when seeing it the first time. Once, there was a man knowing all of that stuff (Chinese theatre cement prints) who told me that “he did not want to damage his boots and just touched it lightly.
That people prefer to refer to “that” rather than just open their eyes in watching if only one movie of the “most having done films ever” actor…that keeps me amazed. Gonzalo says on 4/Jul/08
THe new pic posted by Tony G. helps to erase a lot of the thing being said on this page. Wayne was never below 1`90, never. It is so clear Jay S. says on 4/Jul/08
The bootprints indicate a man of approx. 5'8". Perspective can make my thumb the height of the Statue of Liberty, however the bootprints are proof-positive. Scott B says on 3/Jul/08
Mike C. You make the most sense. I can see Adam seeing Wayne at 6'2 but Wayne being 5'8 is Laughable and FALSE. I saw a picture of Dean Martins Lifts and they looked like Moon Boots. Martin was 5'11 and the Lifts were at least 3 inches which would explain the below Picture of Wayne and Martin. Burt Lancaster said Kurt Douglas wore HUGE Lifts and stood on things to apear taller. He said they hid his Lifts once and Kirt cried. Again the lady I worked with said he was BIG when she met him.. My Mon is real good at judging Heights. When I told her someone said Wayne was 5'8 she blew her stack. She says 6'4 prime and 6'3 in latter years and NEVER below 6'2. Mike C keep up the good work. You and I are on the same page. John Wayne was TALL! mike c says on 3/Jul/08
Gonzalo, Patrick, Scott B....they're not making sense. The sad part is that they're grasping at straws..Gonzalo, your picture of Wayne and Martin is a classic....Dean was about 5'11" (Jerry Lewis states that Dean was 6') and he definitely wore lifts..let's just say 2" for argument sake...Wayne is at least 5-6" taller in that picture....and Gonzalo, do you have the picture of Primo Carnera next to Wayne and 6'2" Red Skelton? but, they must have used camera tricks..Carnera (6'6") and Wayne slightly less in height..wearing a suit no less...have a happy 4th of July..and thank you, Patrick..Mike C Brunobrowne says on 3/Jul/08
Good picture Gonzalo, hey Jay S does Wayne's hand look small now. You are right about one thing his hand is proportional to his frame. He is simply huge beside Dino who had big hands and a big frame for his height because he was a boxer. John Wayne must be standing on a milk crate, yet the length of his torso would suggest otherwise. The only other answer is that he had really really short legs to be 5' 8''. Anonymous says on 3/Jul/08
Dean Martin wore HUGE Lifts and so did Kurt Douglas patrick says on 3/Jul/08
Exact Kurt M! Gonzalo says on 3/Jul/08
Wayne next to Martin. I don´t even see a 3 inch difference
Click Here
Mark, watch Rio bravo, one of the best movies ever made and tell me which is the difference between them.
Jay S., there is a much more strong argument to support the 1`93 claim than the 1`73 claim. Wow, John Wayne at my height. I would be shocked!! Tony G. says on 3/Jul/08
Here is another shot of John Wayne with Ron Howard...
Click Here Mark says on 2/Jul/08
I remember seeing an old clip where John Wayne sang a duet with Dean Martin (in the Dean Martin Variety Show?). Wayne appeared to be only about 3 inches taller then 5'10.5 Dean Martin. Don't know if Dean was wearing lifts, but there certainly didn't appear to be a towering difference in height. Jay S. says on 2/Jul/08
Wow, never underestimate the power of denial. I'm not able to get my feet into John Wayne's bootprints; they're too short and too narrow. Wayne's height, as depicted in the movies, is dubious and can not support the argument that he was 6'4". Point in case; the trailer to "War Wagon" on YouTube where Kurt Douglas 5'9" and John Wayne are standing nose to eye. adam says on 2/Jul/08
Gonzalo, yep. 5`8" is crazy and absurd! But Jay S doesn´t seem to be any kind of idiot, if you know what I mean... I think he has a good point there. Gonzalo, my old friend, I believe that Wayne was about 1.88-1.90 in his best day. Gonzalo says on 2/Jul/08
Jay S., your estimation about Wayne´s height is 5`8? I am sure even Adam is laughing. Anything below 6`2 for Wayne is absurd. Then I guess Ron Howard must be 5`3 Scott B says on 2/Jul/08
John Wayne Being anything less than 6'3 is FALSE. I asked a lady I work with AGAIN how Tall Wayne was when she met him. She said he was NOT wearing Boots or LIFTS. She said he was wearing Tennis shoes. She is 5'8 and her Husband was 6'2. Wayne was taller than her Husband. Tom Selleck said John Wayne was an inch Taller than he was. Hey Rob or Glenn. The next time you run into Selleck, Howard or Caan, ask them how tall Wayne was. Wayne was never below 6'3. Jay S. says on 1/Jul/08
Here is the "concrete evidence;" my 9 1/2 size running shoe next to Wayne's footprint at Grauman's Chinese Theatre. Click Here Again, I'm 5'10." Despite the assertion that Wayne only placed his feet lightly into the cement, the print is deep, clear, and unmistakable. Wayne's hand on Barbara's back is small and not disproportional to his body. I imagine "The Duke" John (Marion Morrison) Wayne managed his public image very carefully and these appearances are rare indeed. I would invite anyone to check it out for themselves. The honor of an Oscar and his feet next to the greatest actors must have outweighed the guarding of his public image. adam says on 1/Jul/08
Jay S, you`re full of it!
Gonzalo, because of those big lifts he wore his feet didn`t look that small. =)
But, Gonzalo my friend that pic with Ron Howard is a good proof. Maybe John Wayne was 6-4! I dont know! Brunobrowne says on 1/Jul/08
Look Jay S., please get a grip of yourself. I saw him on a chat show with Bob Hope and Bing Crosby, they all walked in together. He towered over both of them. at least 5 inches on 5'10.5'' Hope. Now you are not going to tell me that he wore 8 inch heels. As he walks up onto the stage his shoes are clearly visible and are normal. Unless of course you think the other 2 are no more than 5'. Jay S. says on 1/Jul/08
Adam, on an NBC studios tour, the guide said John Wayne was a small man. I thought he was confusing Allan Ladd with John Wayne, but after seeing Wayne's foot print in the concrete, my guestimation is 5'8". My running shoe is a size 9 1/2 (not 10 as previously mentioned). This is Wayne's foot print next to mine. Click Here Gonzalo says on 1/Jul/08
Not a good pic, Jay S. We don´t see what shoes Barbra is wearing and she is closer to the camera. Hard to gauge.
It seems that pic of Wayne next to Ron Howard is not enough. He towers barefoot over an average man in shoes. Wayne looks very close to 1´90 barefoot and he was almost 70. What other proof we need? How many of these famous people have we seen barefoot? Adam, can you please explain to me this sentence? I just don´t get it
Because of lifts his feet didn`t look that small adam says on 1/Jul/08
Jay S, you`ve got a good point there pal. Because of lifts his feet didn`t look that small. I have pretty much same kind of build. Im 6-2 (188cm) and I have small feet, I wear size 11½ (US) sneakers.
Now people, please follow my homework and Watch as early JW films as you can. Jay S, what is your estimation for Wayne`s height? Jay S. says on 30/Jun/08
Here is the image I was refering to: Click Here Jay S. says on 30/Jun/08
There's also a fist print of John Wayne at Grauman's Chinese Theatre. John Wayne had very small hands and feet. I'm guessing size seven shoe, eight at the very most. There's a picture of Barbara Streisand (5'4") beside Wayne at the Academy Awards; he's not a foot taller than she. patrick says on 30/Jun/08
Frankly, some comments have lately become much too phony. This is a serious and clever site which deserves serious reflection. As for small John Wayne's feet", it is quite known; he reportedly was "11". On the other hand, his hands were huge. The Graumann's theatre's prints are often deceptive, depending how hard the personalities push feet or hands into the fresh cement.
As I already wrote it here, I was also surprised when seeing it the first time. Once, there was a man knowing all of that stuff (Chinese theatre cement prints) who told me that “he did not want to damage his boots and just touched it lightly.
That people prefer to refer to “that” rather than just open their eyes in watching if only one movie of the “most having done films ever” actor…that keeps me amazed. Kurt M says on 28/Jun/08
When you see Robert Mitchum next to John Wayne in 'El Dorado', you can see Wayne is clearly at least 3 or more inches taller than Mitchum, who was around 6'1". Scott B says on 28/Jun/08
I think we can all agree Wayne was 6'4 Peak and NEVER below 6'2 at the end. But John Wayne being 5'8 is LAUGHABLE. Hey Glenn. If you ever run into James Caan, ask him how tall Wayne was. Tony G. says on 27/Jun/08
Johny Wayne 5'8"? LOL! That would make him shorter than Michael Landon! I doooooooon't think so! Why does the "5'8" John Wayne when barefoot tower over 5'9" Ron Howard (see my last comment before this one)? patrick says on 27/Jun/08
Hi fellows, I don't know why but several of my last comments (after june 20th) have been deleted.
All of what you say happens to be very interesting Gonzalo, as usual!
The Duke was very tall even and above all, when young in his "B" thirties westerns or other "adventures movies"; I do have plenty of them and he always towers over everybody including his permanent “double”: Yakima Canutt like in “the shadow of the eagle”.
“Wayne admired Canutt’s agility and fearlessness, and Canutt respected Wayne’s willingness to learn the craft and attempt to do his own stunts. Canutt soon taught Wayne how to fall off a horse without breaking his neck. "The two worked together to create a technique that made on-screen fight scenes more realistic. Wayne and Canutt found if they stood at a certain angle in front of the camera, they could throw a punch at an actor’s face and make it look as if actual contact had been made." Together, Canutt and Wayne would pioneer stunt and screen fighting techniques that are still in use today. Much of Wayne's on-screen persona was taken from Canutt's real one. The familiar characterizations we associate with Wayne today; the drawling, hesitant speech and that famous hip-rolling walk of his were pure Canutt. Said Wayne: "I spent weeks studying the way Yakima Canutt walked and talked. He was a real cowhand."
Interesting isn’t it? adam says on 27/Jun/08
Yes, Jay S, thank you for your comment. Rock Hudson said the same thing: Duke Wayne had small feet. And if you watch some of his movies you`ll notice that the man had very long spine and gained much height when he sat down.
I have pretty much the same kind of built. Im 6-2 myself and I have actually pretty short legs, yet I have a very long torso.
That 5`8" or anything like that is BS. He was a pretty tall man but I dont believe he was ever the 6-4 he was described as. I really think that he was about my height, 188cm (or 6-2) in his best days. Maybe slightly over. Jay S. says on 26/Jun/08
I was at Grauman's Chinese Theater on the weekend and placed my feet beside the impressions left by John Wayne made on January 25, 1950 when he was about 43 years of age. I was astonished to see his feet where so small. I'm 5'9" with a size 10 running shoe. There's no way he could be over 6 feet. Jay S. says on 26/Jun/08
I'm 5'9" and I went to Grauman's Chinese Theatre this past weekend and placed my size 10 running shoe next to John Wayne's impression. I was astonished to see his feet were much smaller than mine. Six feet tall? Impossible that is if the impression in the cement is truly his. Proportionally speaking, my guess is that he was most likely under 5'8". Scott B says on 24/Jun/08
Hey Guys. After doing a lot more Research, I am convinced Wayne was 6'4 Peak
and 6'3 at the end. Robert Mitchum said Wayne was 6'4 Barefoot. I dont know why some people think he was below 6'3. mike c glad your back. brunobrowne says on 23/Jun/08
ED 1 I have watched the classic The Quiet Man many times and if as you state that Victor Malagen is 6'3'' then the legend Wayne must have been very tall as he is clearly 2 inches taller than Victor in every scene. I think however Wayne was 6'4'' and this puts Maclagen at 6'2''. However this film was shot in 1952, Wayne was only 45 and Mclagen 66 so he may have been slightly taller when younger circa 6'3''. How you can say he matches Wayne is beyond my comprehension.
Mclagen is very broad I will agree but this has something to do with age, as with Wayne when He put on some weight in later films he too was very broad. Anonymous says on 23/Jun/08
So guys, it’s been long since we discuss about our favourite actor. I must admit I once more, don’t find to add to what my friends Gonzalo and of course, mike c wrote. All of this stuff seems to me so obvious!
Adam and some others, I personally am what we call in French a “cinephile” which means a guy loving features films and who boast about knowing films very, very well.
So ar Gonzalo and micke c. you talk about “early Wayne movies”? I happen to have tens of them! Precisely, one thing which is really obvious in them is the vey tall height of the Duke who always, I mean all the time, towers over everybody else. Even alone, in those movies, he looks very tall. There is one who he plays an aviator and has to climb into a barn and frankly, that’s funny because of the so easy way he does it while “the others” are unable to do it!
I repeat he always, even at that time (30ies) looked very tall related to his horses and far more once over them (saddle lifts?)
I saw a lot of pics with both Mike Mazurky and the Duke and they always looked about the same height.
As for the big trail where he first starred, he really looks taller than anybody else.
Bravo Gonzalo for quoting the Raoul Walsh autobiography. I read the English version where he says 6’4. In Europe, we never have been able to correctly translate English measures!
He also talks (Raoul Walsh) about John Wayne as kind of giant wearing furniture (real ones) as if there were pillows.
If you are not able to see what “us”, silly guys, too naïve fans that we are mike c, Gonzalo or I, too bad!
You consider tons of photos let alone movies, as not being relevant! What can we add to that and argue?
Good to find you again friends! Anonymous says on 23/Jun/08
adam, I sincerely appreciate your position for it is very honest; John Wayne, despite the fact he was “more than an actor” and, whether we love or hate him, was a symbol. He was the only actor having been sacred as an icon when alive. He still is today, even in the traditionally democrat East states (not really on Duke’s side!).
That aside, I don’t understand how you cannot see him very tall, especially when young, when it is more obvious than ever!
I have many DVDs with The Duke starring in 30ies westerns: he’s always, I mean always, much taller than everyone else. Contrary to what it is commonly said here, actors as people were already tall in the States then.
When European were mostly between 5’6 to 5’8 or 9 for the tall ones, Americans were between 5’11 to 6’3. Even in the 60ies in France (worse in Spain or Italy!) a 6’4 man was General de Gaulle appeared to be a real giant! There was picture of him going down the Champs Elysées in Paris after the “liberation” in 1944 where everybody look like a child, not shorter but ridiculed by a 6’4 man.
I mean many actors were between 6’2 and 6’3 between the 30ies and 40ies in America while most Europeans stars were far under 5’11!
As for the Hudson and Mitchum words, do not forget what we hammered right here: at the time – 67 and 69 – John Wayne was definitely not at his best and most men would have retired. He had ribs removed, had to wear when riding a horse, a corset because of a terrible ill and serious surgery got a few years beforehand.
When you see how so many stars have shrunk without having had to go through such treatment, how not admit that John Wayne just wanted to remain the one he used to be?
I find him very tall and imposing in his last films, from The Cow Boys to the Shootist.
I repeat he always looked like a giant when riding his horse!
Ad for his ideas, he was honest enough to claim them even when that did not make him particularly popular. I can understand his point of view when I see how the world is turning.
He prior to anything else, was human. That is the most important and many “leftist” were his friend just because of that. Gonzalo says on 23/Jun/08
Hi, Maike C. Great to have you back. Here is the link with the album we share. You can see the pic of Wayne next to Mazurski who is standing quite loose at the bar.
Click Here
The pic of Wayne with Howard is quite revealing. I have to admit that I have seen some strange things with Wayne. But the times he has appeared barefoot on the screen he still looks very tall.
The debate continues Gonzalo says on 23/Jun/08
Great pic, Tony G. Thanks for sharing. Howrd in shoes must be around 1`78 and Wayne looks clearly taller, about 12 cms and he is not standing straight. At 68 and looking old Wayne was very close to 1`90 so it is easy to think he was taller than that in his prime adam says on 22/Jun/08
Why was my comment deleted, Rob?
[Editor Rob: I mentioned this - I lost some comments recently.] Tony G. says on 22/Jun/08
I've watched the scene from "The Shootist" (1976) in which a barefoot John Wayne was standing next to 5'9" Ron Howard. Wayne is far taller than Ron!
I'll add this link and see if it works:
Click Here mike c says on 20/Jun/08
Gonzalo, I'm back..just had my graduation ceremony today, but still 4 days of busy school days left. For starters, please post, if you can, the original photos I sent you..the tall Wayne...I'm not sure which Adam I'm reading (it's amazing how everyone is 6'5" tall and a boxer at that on these pages), but whomever Adam is, I doubt if he can read let alone judge height.more to follow..I think your post will open some eyes...mike c ps. Adam, if you can read, please read this: mike c says on 19/Nov/07
Thank you, Patrick..well said and I totally agree. I bought Duke, We're Glad We Knew You a while back and am in my second reading. I've mentioned that many contributors do not do any research, but just repeat what they've heard without any verification.....interesting book the aforementioned..on page 55 is a picture of the midget Wayne from the movie Dakota 1945 and the gentleman at the bar is Mike Mazurki. Boy does Wayne look short next to him!!...Mike's wife is quoted in this book as follows (pages 19-20):"Duke and Mike loved to drink and play cards, although Mike was no boozer. His body was too important to him. Many of the guys like Ward Bond and Grant Withers were what I'd call functioning alcoholics. They'd be in places like Monument Valley for months and what else could you do? Drink and play cards. Duke amd Mike were the same hieght. Mazurki always made him look good, especially in the fight scenes. There was no jealousy. They were just good buddies". Now, just go to Google and type in Mike Mazurki...Mike 6'5"/6.6"...but, I know, someone said the Duke was 6'1"...and "fatty"..well, this fatty could have kicked the **** out of any of us, in spite of his injuries and myriad operations..take it to the bank!
PPS..you want an early Wayne movie to watch..try Dark Command with Roy Rogers....now, that's homework!! Gonzalo says on 20/Jun/08
Adam, you are a nice man. I like you although we disagree. I don´t have much time to do that research now. Maybe in the future...
Well, to see Wayne barefoot looking 10 cms taller than Jeffrey hunter is relevant. To see Wayne looking 5-6 cms taller than Lee Marvin in sneakers is relevant. Wayne was listed 6.4`5 when playing football in college. In Raoul Walsh´s biography he describes when at that height (in spanish it is said 1`90; I think in the original book in english it is said something different. I hope my friend Mike C can say something about it...if he stops working that hard at school!!). Raoul Walsh gave Wayne his first important role in The big Trail back in 1930. Is it one of his early films you mention? Wayne wasn´t a star when he did Stagecoach (what a masterpiece), it was after that movie when he became important, although if you think about it he didn´t do any good movie until he met John Ford and Howard Hawks well into the forties. He started weaing lifts, after or before Stagecoach? In Stagecoach he looks very very tall. Taller than George Bacroft (definitely a big guy. You guys should watch Tha docks of New York, another masterpiece. I have seen Bancroft listed 1`88. He certainly looked that big in Docks). Nobody knew him when he did Stagecoach, did he wear lifts to become a star in that movie?
Well, I hope Patrick can join me and nice Scott B. in this interesting debate adam says on 19/Jun/08
And Im not that Adam who claimed to be 6-5 etc... Scott B. says on 19/Jun/08
Adam. I can buy Wayne Being 6'3 BAREFOOT in his Prime and 6'2 BAREFOOT in later years. But for you to say he was below 6'2 is FALSE. My Aunt meet Robert Mitchum on an Airplane back in the 70's. They talked a lot about Wayne. Mitchum told her Wayne was a tall man OVER 6'3 BAREFOOT. Look how LARGE he was on a Hoarse. In the Movie Liberty Valance there was a scene of someone carring Wayne out of a Burning Cabin. Wayne Looked Huge and the guy carrying him was having a hard Time of it. Scott B. says on 19/Jun/08
Adam. I can buy Wayne Being 6'3 BAREFOOT in his Prime and 6'2 BAREFOOT in later years. But for you to say he was below 6'2 is FALSE. My Aunt meet Robert Mitchum on an Airplane back in the 70's. They talked a lot about Wayne. Mitchum told her Wayne was a tall man OVER 6'3 BAREFOOT. Look how LARGE he was on a Hoarse. In the Movie Liberty Valance there was a scene of someone carring Wayne out of a Burning Cabin. Wayne Looked Huge and the guy carring him was having a hard Time of it. adam says on 19/Jun/08
It`s all about his early movies, my dead old friend Gonzalo.
I`ve seen people who say that he sure didn`t look so tall in his early days. Films before Stagecoach was made. So, Gonzalo... I`ve given some homework for you as well.
Like I said people:
Get some very old Wayne movies. I mean before Stagecoach. The time when he wasn`t the star yet. When he made only co-star -parts. Watch those movies and put some material here. Pictures, youtube-stuff, etc...
Here`s some summer holiday homework for all of you John Wayne height mystery solvers! Soon we`ll find out what kind of man he was. Now my little children... Get to work and start to watch some films! Or else I´ll find you and.... =) Gonzalo says on 19/Jun/08
Well, Adam, all I know is Wayne looks very tall to me, at least 1`90. I have seen him barefoot in several movies and he still looked very tall. Maybe he wore lifts at the end of his career when he started losing height. But we haven´t seen any evidence of lifts so far and we have been discussing it for ages Adam says on 19/Jun/08
I am 6 foot 5 inches flat foot and know for sure that from watching waynes movies that there is no way he was taller than 6'2" in his prime. I garauntee he wore lifts in those boots most likely making him 6' 0" flat foot. Anonymous says on 18/Jun/08
I can buy Wayne being 6'3 in his Prime and 6'2 towards the end. But Wayne was NEVER Below 6'2. adam says on 18/Jun/08
Yep, I didnt read too good, did I. My bad. But...
Yes, actually Peter Fonda was 6-2½ at that time. 189cm. And Wayne looks easily 5cm taller (2 inches).... So he was AT LEAST a legit 194cm (6-4½) at the age of 71. Well... do you believe that? He had shrunk probably, yes. At least an inch. So at his peak he was about 198cm, 6-6. Do you believe that? I didnt think so.
Please dear Gonzalo. Wayne had one hell of an image and that included that he had to be a very tall man. That`s why he wore lifts.
The same old story. Gonzalo, Patrick and their pals keep sending those same pics and some sarcasm in the ring while those pictures are no good. And me and couple of others keep claiming that he wasn`t that tall man and we don`t have any good proof here. You don`t have either but... This just doesn`t go any further.
Here`s a great piece of homework for ALL of you:
1) Get OLD John Wayne movies. I mean before Stagecoach.
2) Take a great number of random shots and put them here or to youtube or something.
Thank you. Please follow my instructions or I`ll send a dozen of nigg... =) Just kidding fellows. =) But please, do that if you mind. Gonzalo says on 18/Jun/08
Adam, Wayne never appeared in Gung Din. McLaglen did. You should read Ed (1)`s post more carefully.
John Wayne taller than Peter Fonda, listed here 1`88. It was a year before Wayne`s death. Wayne was 71 so probably had shrunk. Wayne is taller and Fonda is closer to the camera. Wayne was wearing boots with his tuxedo. Or wearing lifts, of course
Click Here adam says on 17/Jun/08
Ed, great points, great notes. I haven`t seen Gunga Din but I believe you. That was in those days when Wayne wasn`t a big star yet so he didn`t wear lifts... at least in that film with Cary Grant who was 6-1. Nothing more.
It`s obvious that later Wayne wore lifts and got lots of help from camera angles and had the ground advantage so he looked very tall, like 6-4 to 6-5.
But yes, Ed. I agree with you 100%: Wayne was about 6-2 to max. 6-3 peak. Ed(1) says on 16/Jun/08
I just recently watched Gunga Din with Cary Grant(6ft1) and Victor Mclaglen(6ft3), and this got me thinking about Wayne's height regarding The Quiet Man. In Gunga Din Mclaglen looked to have maybe an inch on Grant tops, and this was in 1939 at the age of 53. In 1952 when The Quiet Man was made, Mclaglen was 64 and in failing health yet still matched up to Wayne in height and was bigger in build. Unless Mclaglen was wearing lifts(which seems dubious), could Wayne have been more like 6ft2.5-6ft3 tops at his peak with his cowboy boots giving him that extra boost to maintain the 6ft4-6ft5 look he had in most of his early film? Mclaglen would have most likely lost a bit in height by the age of 64, and it just doesn't make sense how both him and Wayne were evenly matched unless Wayne was a bit shorter then listed. The only other scenario I can think of is Grant was taller then 6ft1, and Mclaglen lost zero height by his 60's. adam says on 11/Jun/08
"Well... I have to admit one thing: The Duke wore lifts. He was tall as a young man but definitely not the 6ft4 he`s always been described as." - Gregory Peck, 1999 brunobrowne says on 6/Jun/08
Sorry Adam, there is too much evidence to show that Wayne was at least 6'4'' in his prime. Look at him in the diner confrontation in Liberty Valance, he looks clearly taller than both Stewart and marvin on level ground. They are slender men while Wayne is much broader yet he still is taller. Scott B. says on 5/Jun/08
Adam. Why on earth would anyone listen to you over people who MET him and KNEW him. Look at Wayne's Footwear in Donovan's Reef. He was NOT wearing lifts. They were low heeled shoes Period. And why would Robert Mitchum lie about Wayne's
Height? If you want to see Boots with Lifts in them, watch Bonanza. Landon and Green both wore 3 inch lifts. Look at Wayne's Boots. I do not see any lifts Period. adam says on 5/Jun/08
Gonzalo, I believe you. I believe that story. Wayne really looked much taller than a legit 6-3 man. What was the year? In the sixties? And much taller? Like 6-5? Well... do you believe that Wayne was 6-5???
He wore lifts. Period. Dont give me that Marvin crap. He wore lifts in every shoes he had. And camera angles favoured him. Gonzalo says on 5/Jun/08
I told the story a long time ago. A woman I knew saw Wayne in Madrid. I guess it was when he was shooting that circus movie with Rita Hayworth and Claudia Cardinale. She saw Wayne in Villamagna hotel, one of the best in Madrid. She said Wayne was very, very tall. That woman was in her fifties around 1`74 and I distinctly remember that she said Wayne was much taller than his youngest son. I knew her son well and he looked around 1`91-92 to me. That`s exactly what she told me. I guess she found Wayne taller not only because he could have been a bit taller but because Wayne was big while her son was very thin. Wayne must have been an imposing man patrick says on 4/Jun/08
Bravo Scott B! That is so obvious! Scott B. says on 3/Jun/08
John Wayne was 6'4 in his prime and 6'3 towards the end. Adam how do you explain Wayne being 3 inches taller than Lee Marvin in Donovan's Reef. They both had on normal footware. Also, I talked to someone who met him in the 60's. She said he was OVER 6'3. She herself is 5'8 and he Towered over her.And I also read an interview with Robert Mitchum who was Wayne's good friend. Mitchum said Wayne was 6'4 in his PRIME. Wayne was NEVER Below 6'3. Scott B. says on 3/Jun/08
John Wayne was 6'4 in his prime and 6'3 towards the end. Adam how do you explain Wayne being 3 inches taller than Lee Marvin in Donovan's Reef. They both had on normal footware. Also, I talked to someone who met him in the 60's. She said he was OVER 6'3. She herself is 5'8 and he Towered over here.And I also read an interview with Robert Mitchum who was Wayne's good friend. Mitchum said Wayne was 6'4 in his PRIME. Wayne was NEVER Below 6'3. Gonzalo says on 3/Jun/08
I thought De Gaulle was 1`98, he was called "double metre".
Wayne was good friends with many left wing actors such as Lauren Bacall or Katherine Hepburn. I still don´t understand why every single person who says Wayne wasn´t very tall hates his political points of view. patrick says on 3/Jun/08
adam, I sincerely appreciate your position for it is very honest; John Wayne, despite the fact he was “more than an actor” and, whether we love or hate him, was a symbol. He was the only actor having been sacred as an icon when alive. He still is today, even in the traditionally democrat East states (not really on Duke’s side!).
That aside, I don’t understand how you cannot see him very tall, especially when young, when it is more obvious than ever!
I have many DVDs with The Duke starring in 30ies westerns: he’s always, I mean always, much taller than everyone else. Contrary to what it is commonly said here, actors as people were already tall in the States then.
When European were mostly between 5’6 to 5’8 or 9 for the tall ones, Americans were between 5’11 to 6’3. Even in the 60ies in France (worse in Spain or Italy!) a 6’4 man was General de Gaulle appeared to be a real giant! There was picture of him going down the Champs Elysées in Paris after the “liberation” in 1944 where everybody look like a child, not shorter but ridiculed by a 6’4 man.
I mean many actors were between 6’2 and 6’3 between the 30ies and 40ies in America while most Europeans stars were far under 5’11!
As for the Hudson and Mitchum words, do not forget what we hammered right here: at the time – 67 and 69 – John Wayne was definitely not at his best and most men would have retired. He had ribs removed, had to wear when riding a horse, a corset because of a terrible ill and serious surgery got a few years beforehand.
When you see how so many stars have shrunk without having had to go through such treatment, how not admit that John Wayne just wanted to remain the one he used to be?
I find him very tall and imposing in his last films, from The Cow Boys to the Shootist.
I repeat he always looked like a giant when riding his horse!
Ad for his ideas, he was honest enough to claim them even when that did not make him particularly popular. I can understand his point of view when I see how the world is turning.
He prior to anything else, was human. That is the most important and many “leftist” were his friend just because of that. adam says on 3/Jun/08
True. Yet in the Shootist Wayne looks to be at least 2 inches taller. Making Wayne a legit 6-5. Well is here anyone who thinks Wayne was EVER or (even better) at the age of 70 6-5? No? Well why did he look so much taller than Jimmy Stewart who was ALWAYS at least 6-3? Lifts. You dont have to like it but you know it`s true.
And painterface says on 3/Jun/08
I'm watching the man who shot liberty valance, right now...and wayne is standing right next to stewart and doesn't even look taller than him. and I'm sure wayne is wearing boots in most of his films, including this one. adam says on 2/Jun/08
And don`t get me wrong.. I really do like his films and I think he was a charismatic actor. I just dont accept his stupid political thoughts or the fact that he was 6 feet 4 inches tall. patrick says on 2/Jun/08
As all of the others actors Ricardo since the Duke would wear those boots in westerns! No more no less! adam says on 2/Jun/08
Ricardo, damn right. No way was Wayne ever even close to Rock`s height. And in Wayne`s early films he doesn`t look that tall. And both Mitchum and Hudson have said that Duke wore lifts. If he was EVEN CLOSE to 6-4 why would he wore lifts? Ricardo says on 31/May/08
I agree with Adam`s comments. Wayne was a strong guy and although he normally appeared taller than the other people in the films, he was never that much taller than the other co-stars as Rock in his movies. Rock was always looking much taller than the other co-stars. I think Wayne was around 1.90-1.91 and Rock was probably around 1.96. Moreover Wayne was always wearing boots. patrick says on 30/May/08
the Duke died almost 30 years ago. People having known him must be either very old or too young for having met him before he was 45!
Anyway, they probably knew a late 60ies John Wayne while he was himself around 60. Mots people were not that accurate about height at the time. They used to saying "this man is very tall" just because being 6'3. I trust Glenn more than anyone else but this is not him in question, nor the ones he will ask how tall he was. We have so many pics and movies! Have you ever noticed how huge, I mean wide as a truck, he "always" appeared when shot during a public event (generally in tuxedo): always much taller than everybody around him but also twice broader! I noticed that since I was myself very young! The Harvard students speaking about him and telling how, actually, nice he was when coming to the University, specified he was monumental man. Who says that about a 6'2 man? A journalist said when he died, that the word "build" had been invented just for him! Scott B. says on 28/May/08
Lets see what people say when Glenn ask's around how tall Wayne was. I say 6'3 in his socks. patrick says on 28/May/08
adam: how tall do you think he was in the 50ies, so before surgery?
I am inclined from my far youth, he was what is claimed in "the quiet man": 6'4.5. Clint Eastwood who was real 6'4 when we all saw him in Paris in 1979 (or so), towering over aboslutely everybody by a good head is definitely not the same man now though not having gone through the terrible surgery the Duke underwent in 64. He could indeed be 6'3.3/4 in his late years as says M2. M2 says on 27/May/08
I recall a newspaper article in the late 1960s or early 1970s listing Wayne officially as "6-foot-three-and-three-quarters." brunobrowne says on 26/May/08
Look at Donovans reef 2-3 inches taller than Lee Marvin(6-2) and similar footwear. This film was made in 1963, 1 year before his serious operation for lung cancer. At 56 he wouldn't have lost any height so Marvin plus 2-3 inches puts Wayne at least 6'4'' and probably slightly taller. adam says on 26/May/08
patrick says on 22/May/08:
"The Duke was barely shorter than the giant James Arness who was then undoubtedly 6’7"
That`s right. He looked less than two inches shorter. Well do you believe that Wayne was over 6-5? Do you? I thought so...
Obviously Wayne, like so many others, were made to look taller next to the huge Arness. Lifts, camera angles, boxes, footwear, ground....
And like a couple of guys have said: In his early films he sure DIDN`T look that tall. Then in the late 40s he started to look toweringly big.... But as a young man when he wasn`t a big star yet he didn`t look 6`4". glenn says on 22/May/08
im sure i must know people who met him.so ill ask around. patrick says on 22/May/08
Frankly I don't understand you JT. I agree with this dear Gonzalo and brunobrowne 100%.
Hey guys, have you ever noticed how tall John Wayne was on a horse?
Even as a child I saw that! He looked always huge and very tall though his horse is always a high one himself.
He probably had “lifts” under his saddle! I used to riding horses and I can tell you it is impossible to cheat on that matter.
How tall do you think his son, Patrick, really was? Listed at 6’2 he perhaps only was 6’1 but anyway, he always has been dwarfed in height as in width by his father.
As for the pic of the Paramount I know for probably longer than most of you for being 55 and having seen it in 1969 when it was taken: I never saw more than les than an inch between Rock and the Duke while there is big difference between Yves Montand who was a solid 6’1.5 or even 6’2.
As Gonzalo said it, I met him notably in 1986 while Yves Montand was 66 and he towered everybody by a head!
I remember him speaking about the stars he met so often in America he loved so much and admired.
He saw about this: “I’m 6’2 and for the first time I felt short with all of these giants”. He named John Wayne first, then Rock and then Clint he saw as the “new star” of the time.
That was the first time I heard of the Yves Montand’s height!
The Duke was barely shorter than the giant James Arness who was then undoubtedly 6’7 since the 6’6 Clint Walker said “he was the only one taller than I by an inch at 6’7”.
John Wayne was 6’4.5 when young until probably his 40ies and perhaps 6’3.5 older.
Never less than 6’3. that should have been too visible.
As I recently wrote to Gonzalo, “try to wear lifts in cow boy boots, even made on purpose, and…walk!”.
One inch lift at a pinch but not more unless having your feet sloping down ahead which would have been visible. You cannot cheat that much with lifts!
4 inch ones would simply be unwearable! adam says on 22/May/08
Yes he could have been wearing those lifts inside his boots too... I still think he was about 6-2 - 6-3 at his peak. JT says on 22/May/08
brunobrowne says on 21/May/08
....If you look closely at the pic wayne's shoulder and Hudson's are at the same height. Wayne head is slightly bowed which makes him appear .5 to 1 inch lower no more. If Wayne has 1 inch advantage with footwear then this puts him at 6-4,(Hudson 6-5) and he had lost height by the 1960s. In essence Wayne at his peak height would easily have matched Rock.
First, the shoulder height is irrelevant (some guys have short necks, heads, etc.). Second, Wayne is clearly shorter than Hudson in that pic, and the posture is comparable. Third, if you look at angle of the steps, the camera is favoring those to the right of the pic (towards Clint). I don't think anyone here believes that Wayne was 6'5" at peak height. He would probably be 2 inches shorter than Hudson there in comparable footwear, but this does not rule out a 6'4" peak height. Anonymous says on 21/May/08
Wayne was 6'3 in His Prime and no less than 6'2 when he died. Anonymous says on 21/May/08
Adam have you ever met Wayne? I talked to a Lady that met him back in the 60's. She said he was TALL. She said he was at least 6'3. John Wayne Was NEVER Below 6'3. Hey Glen. The next time you run into someone in Hollywood who knew him, ask them how tall he was. brunobrowne says on 21/May/08
Sorry Adam, firstly the paramount pic is taken in the 60s when JW was in his 60s and RH was in his 40s. Wayne had a serious operation (ribs removed etc)in the early 1960s which affected his height. If you look closely at the pic wayne's shoulder and Hudson's are at the same height. Wayne head is slightly bowed which makes him appear .5 to 1 inch lower no more. If Wayne has 1 inch advantage with footwear then this puts him at 6-4,(Hudson 6-5) and he had lost height by the 1960s. In essence Wayne at his peak height would easily have matched Rock. adam says on 21/May/08
Yes JT... No way was Wayne taller or ever never even CLOSE to Rock Hudson`s height. Hudson sure as hell could have been even 198cm! That`s 6-6. Well he has commented that Wayne wasn`t as tall as many believed. He has said that. And I believe that John Wayne was at most 191cm at his peak. Gonzalo says on 21/May/08
How many inches do boots add? More than two? Considering Hudson had ordinary shoes that added 3 cms, boots add (I don´t know, 5 cms ?), Wayne looks at the most, 2 cms shorter than Hudson. If Hudson was around 1`95 Wayne was at that time around 1`90-91. Both have a loose posture. Wayne was 62 and had one lung removed, it is easy to imagine he could have been taller than that in his prime.
And you can not put lifts in boots I think. That pic is quite reliable: you can see their feet, it is on even ground, there is no real advantage in perspective...So if Wayne looks that tall next to Hudson, even in boots, it helps to forget all that crap about Wayne being 1`85 Gonzalo says on 21/May/08
Wayne looking clearly taller than James Stewart. Wayne is closer to the camera, that´s true
Click Here JT says on 20/May/08
Click Here Probably a 2 inch gap at this point if Wayne is in cowboy boots. Anonymous says on 19/May/08
The picture Gonzalo has of Wayne and Marvin in Donovan´s reef, Wayne looks 3 inches Taller. adam you need to learn how to Judge height's better. You are WAY OFF. Anonymous says on 17/May/08
John Wayne had Lee Marvin in Donovan's Reef by at least 2 inches. Wayne was 6'3 Barefoot. patrick says on 15/May/08
Right, dear Gonzalo, about everything! Yves Montand was really tall and I would have said 6'2 if he had not personally claimed 1m87 (a tad under 6'2)and it is obvious that the Duke was a good deal of inches above him!
As for Lee Marvin, whom was in any case under 6'2 in the early 60ies as well as older, he is always, I mean always, clearly shorter than Wayne. That is more evident in Donovan's reef because both are precisely wearing "normal" shoes instead of cow boy boots as in Liberty Valence. Nevertheless, in that one, I always saw him shorter by at least two inches, even when much younger than I am! Open your eyes and stop splitting hairs !
Gonzalo is absolutely right in assuming that kind of loss of height above all after 64 and his severe surgery added later to his age. Gonzalo says on 13/May/08
Adam, watch movies not pics.
Does Marvin look taller than Wayne in this pic?
Click Here
Have you seen Donovan´s reef?
Wayne looking barely taller than Hudson, who was 1`94´96. Wayne was old by that time so he probably had shrunk by then. Wayne looks `-7 cms taaller than Yves Montand who was 1`87. Our good friend Patrick can confirm Montand´s height since he saw him in the flesh, in Coluche`s funeral.
Funny how a 1`85 man can look as tall as a 1`95 man. Have you seen a pic of a 1`85 man (such as Harrison Ford, Bill Murray, Keanu Reeves) looking as tall as 1`95 man (such as Tim Robbins, John Cleese)? I thought so
Click Here
Fu adam says on 11/May/08
Click Here Wayne is slouching but even though he would straighten up, he would still be the same height as Marvin
Click Here Wayne was shorter than Stewart.
John Wayne didnt wore lifts?
"Increasingly by the early 1960s Wayne used to wear three or four-inch lifts in his shoes, a practice that mystified friends and co-stars like Bobby Darin, Capucine and Robert Mitchum"
Also, Rock Hudson: "I did a movie with Duke Wayne and was very surprised to find out he had small feet, wore lifts, and a corset. Hollywood is seldom what it seems."
So both Mitchum and Hudson were kidding? Come on...
And those barefoot scenes... well I haven`t seen one good barefoot scene with Wayne in it but I guess that camera angles were made to fool you. Scott B. says on 8/May/08
I agree with Gonzalo. Wayne NEVER Wore 4 inch lifts. Wayne was 6'4 at peak and 6'3 in later years. In Donovan`s reef he had Marvin by at least 2 inches. Gonzalo says on 8/May/08
Adam, that pic is decieving. Wayne looks 1`83-84 which was not the case. That idea of Wayne wearing 4 inch lifts is absurd. Wayne was barefoot in several movies and didn´t look much shorter than with shoes on. In Donovan`s reef he is wearing sneakers and he was much taller than Lee Marvin, who wasn´t exactly a midget.
That pic with Coop is not reliable, you can´t see their feet. I have said this before: after all this time discussing about Wayne´s height nobody has shown any evidence of him being around 1´85, as the lifts`group suggest. Nobody Anonymous says on 7/May/08
Guys. I think its safe to say Wayne was 6'3 in his Prime and 6'2 in later years.
There is no way Wayne was ever below 6'2. But I would not rule out 6'4 in his Prime either. adam says on 7/May/08
Yes, that`s exactly what I meant. Well I dont know if the ground is even but Cooper sure looks taller and Wayne seriously doesn`t look tall or big.
And also the pic next to 6`3½" George Sanders where Wayne looks marginally shorter...
Gonzalo, yes I think you are about right... 190cm is pretty close. Gonzalo says on 7/May/08
Where is the pic, Adam? Are you going to post for the 700th time the pic of the submarine? What a great pic that is, so reliable....
Coop and Wayne were about the same height: 1`90-92 cm adam says on 5/May/08
Why wasn`t my comment posted? Rob? adam says on 4/May/08
Look at this! The 6ft3 Cooper looks at least an inch taller than Wayne. Both men are slouching and Cooper even more than Wayne! If they both straightened up Cooper would be like 2 inches taller. Gene says on 2/May/08
Hes a giant in his time.How can a man be so tall and macho like him.6ft4 is right and was proved by too many westerns... adam says on 29/Apr/08
James, thank you. Certain people obviously dont want to believe that. But as a young man..? I`m not sure about his height. He could have been six-four, no doubts. But I remember seeing a pic of him with George Sanders and didn`t look taller than the six-three or slightly more Sanders. Gonzalo says on 21/Apr/08
In The shootist Wayne is clearly taller than Stewart. In Liberty Valance they look around the asme height mike c says on 19/Apr/08
Mark, good observation. Now, if you can, watch the scene as JW and JS are exiting the office..JW is taller...glad someone is doing his homework instead of just repeating what others say. Mark and Scott B, glad you're aboard. mike c Scott b. says on 18/Apr/08
Thanks Glenn. I agree with Mark and mike c. Wayne is taller than Stewart. Wayne
was 6'4 in his prime easy. No less than 6'3 Barefoot in later years. Mark says on 18/Apr/08
I just now watched big John enter the "Doc's" clinic (Jimmy Stewart) and stand face to face with Mr. Stewart. Jimmy was no less than 6" 3". John looks down at Jimmy - and both were wearing boots. I guess that makes him 6" 3"+ at the very least. glenn says on 17/Apr/08
that would be a job for rob,scott b.hope he reads this. mike c says on 16/Apr/08
Scott B...you're absolutely right. JW was not shorter than JS..He was 6'4"+ barefoot...just buy or rent The Quiet Man and look at the scene when he's standing in the doorway of his cottage...tell me he's not minimum 6'4"+ barefoot. Glad to read your comments. Scott B says on 15/Apr/08
Glenn: Can you get a hold of the picture with Wayne and Christopher Reeve? I am Convinced Wayne was 6'3 Barefoot. And Wayne was not shorter than stewart. patrick says on 14/Apr/08
John Wayne looks shorter than several actors in only one movie: the longest day.
When meeting Steve Forrest with Tom Tryon, he looks shorter during the first scene, whatever angle it is.
After, he looks taller then shorter and at last more or less matching Forrest but it’s on an uneven soil.
The same with Robert Ryan: I am a “shy” 6’4 (and 6’4.5 when younger) Duke adept but I have to report what I see as anyone can do just in watching the DVD.
Incidentally, the longest day is great timeless movie which you can watch over and over.
It’s by far, much better than the excellent “saving private Ryan”; question of casting and of “something else” depending on “whom” then, made the movies.
Directors and actors; take “3:10 to Yuma”; I like R. Crowe and C. Bale but compare them with G. Ford and Van Heflin; everything’s said. adam says on 13/Apr/08
well he was shorter than jimmy stewart, right? he looked shorter than jimmy in tmwslw Anonymous says on 12/Apr/08
Didn't John Wayne meet Christopher Reeve after the 1st Superman movie. That photo would be nice to see. patrick says on 11/Apr/08
Gonzalo: I just cannot join you any longer! Try to mail me something please!
John Wayne looks shorter than several actors in only on movie: the longest day.
When meeting Steve Forrest with Tom Tryon, he looks shorter during the first scene, whatever angle it is.
After, he looks taller then shorter and at last more or less matching Forrest but it’s on an uneven soil.
The same with Robert Ryan: I am a “shy” 6’4 (and 6’4.5 when younger) Duke adept but I have to report what I see as anyone can do just in watching the DVD.
Incidentally, the longest day is great timeless movie which you can watch over and over.
It’s by far, much better than the excellent “saving private Ryan”; question of casting and of “something else” depending on “whom” then, made the movies.
Directors and actors; take “3:10 to Yuma”; I like R. Crowe and C. Bale but compare them with G. Ford and Van Heflin; everything’s said. adam says on 6/Apr/08
Duke Wayne! my favourite actor, yes! he stood at least 6`2" mike c says on 27/Mar/08
Gonzalo, tu humor contiene tinte de Cervantes....surely you jest, Gonzalo! Wayne is like a midget next to the tall Marvin..cuidate, mike Scott B. says on 27/Mar/08
BKZ. There is No way Wayne was below 6'2. I think he was 6'3 Barefoot. I have talked to someone who met him and she said Wayne was well over 6'0. She said 6'3. patrick says on 25/Mar/08
Bruno : you’re absolutely right !
Dear Gonzalo, if I did not know you…I would have taken you as a.. »fool”!
Fortunately, I know you and your great sense of humour, voluntary that one unlike the BKZ’s!
Gonzalo, keep in mind that sometimes, it’s just impossible to open pics!!!
About Lee Marvin, rewatching The Dirty Dozen (12th time?) I can say that he was certainly over 6’2; in any case that how he looks in the movie when next to Robert Ryan, Donald Sutherland or even George Kennedy.
Yes, in The Dirty Dozen, he looks 6’3, just shrunk by the imposing and monumental Clint Walker. Bruno says on 24/Mar/08
John Wayne was 6'4 in later years, he would have been slightly taller in the 30s and 40s, closer to 6'5. I saw him in one of his last interviews with Barbara Walters and although he was sitting down you could see that he was very tall by the length of his legs. Gonzalo says on 24/Mar/08
Wayne looking shorter than Lee Marvin, who was at least 1`85. I think Wayne didn´t even reached the 1`80 mark
Click Here Gonzalo says on 24/Mar/08
Frank2 said Wayne looked around 6`3 when he saw him. That was in the late sixties or early seventies, son Wayne could have shrunk by then. Frank2 also said that he believed Wayne was 6`4 barefoot in his heyday. Mike says on 23/Mar/08
"Frank2" is the guy I'm thinking of. What does he have to say about Wayne? mike c says on 23/Mar/08
BKZ, the Easter bunny just left my daughters a hundred dollar bill with chocolate roses...mike c ps. thank you, I needed a good laugh! Mike says on 22/Mar/08
...after watching Wayne with Robert Mitchum, Claude Akins, Rock Hudson, Jimmy Stweart, Lee Marvin and more, I'm convinced he was a solid 6'4. Whoever put him at 6 feet even is crazy (no offense). I saw no comments on here from the guy who's opinion I trust (who worked with alot of these guys, but his name escapes me. Glenn2?) patrick says on 21/Mar/08
Moe ,Lawson and, of course, MikeC, you definitely are right!
Nothing to add. I am flabbergasted when I read such a comment as the JWHEIGHT’s!
Saying people are “looking like”, which implies “approximation”, such an accurate estimation as “6’2.75” just left me speechless! BKZ says on 21/Mar/08
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you can find the truth out at Universal Pictures (owner of Universal studios) Its a documented fact and part of the Tour at either park that Marion Robert Morrison aka John Wayne was not over 6 feet tall. mike c says on 19/Mar/08
Good observation, Moe. There's a picture of Wayne and Hutton in John Wayne, A Life in Pictures....they're eye to eye...they're putting out oil well fires!! mike c says on 19/Mar/08
Hi Talker. Watch Hondo when you get a chance...either rent it or buy it (less than $20.)...sorry, I respect your opinion, but I've seen Valance too many times to agree that JS was taller...read below. Take care. Mike C ps. see especially the Shootist in JS's office and tell me Wayne was shorter. Use the slow motion button of your channel changer when they meet eye to eye... talker says on 17/Mar/08
i just saw an obscure little movie called "the little hut",Niven and Granger walk around barefoot on sand,Granger looks hardly taller than Niven.I'll have to reevaluate Granger,i had him at 6'2" but now i believe he wasnt over 6'1".
The best case for 6'4" for Wayne is still "Donovan's reef",the bad case is Valance,i 'll have to check him out next to R.Ryan. JWHEIGHT says on 16/Mar/08
in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance....it looks like Jimmy Stewart 6'3, John Wayne 6'2.75, and Lee Marvin 6'1.25 lsu alum says on 15/Mar/08
john wayne waa measured at usc at 6'4.5".he may have lost some height in his later years,but only an inch or so Lawson says on 15/Mar/08
i remember seeing a clip of a stage hand taliking about him saying that (with his cowboy boots and hat on he looked like he was seven feet tall, id assume he was around 6'4" Moe says on 14/Mar/08
The mvie, 'The Green Berets' Jim Hutton played opposite of Wayne. Jim Hutton was a verified 6'5"....they look each other almost in the eye. Wayne was a 6'4" guy Anonymous says on 11/Mar/08
John Wayne was 6'3 Barefoot NO SHORTER. mike c says on 8/Mar/08
Just recieved Dark Command starring the Duke and Roy Rogers...1940. Roy is listed as between 5'10.5" and 5'11" in all the sites...in ALL scenes the Duke towers over him. In one scene the boots are clearly visible. Both have on at least 1.5" heels..the Duke is at minimum 6" taller..no doubt whatsoever. Mike C Kerry says on 7/Mar/08
John Wayne was 6'3", Ward Bond was 6'1". just a fan says on 2/Mar/08
In "the quiet man" he is asked his height by his friend Mr Flynn and says
6'4 1/2" I beliive it patrick says on 29/Feb/08
More than that Dear Gonzalo! Stewart Granger was long listed 6'3 and looked so in many movies but he definitely was not shorter than 6'2, even "old"!
I saw in the bonus of Hondo, a story of Ward Bond, how “good looking” and impressive he was when around 28!
Crazy the guy whom would have tried to defy him! I for sure, wouldn’t have done it!
He really was scary to me and threatening too while John Wayne, just beside him looked already how he always did until his death: good, helpful, smiling, protective, caring as a big noble good dog is to be!
Incidentally, he was notably taller than Ward Bond whom was yet taller than everyone else!
Look at Ward in 30 or 40ies movies; he stand very tall while being much strapping than all the others…but the Duke! Gonzalo says on 28/Feb/08
I agree with Talker and anonymous, Wayne was at least 1`91 barefoot. Gammy61, your comments are hard to understand. Wayne walking on elevating ground? In what movie was that? I can buy the lifts rumour, although I have seen no evidence so far, but walking on elevating ground....That sounds crazy.
Yes, Wayne was 5 or 6 cms than Stewart Granger in North to Alaska. Granger was a tall man, 1´86 at least Anonymous says on 27/Feb/08
GUYS! John Wayne was at least 6'3 Barefoot. Ive watched to maney Wayne Movies and know without a doubt he was a tall man. Ive seen him in movies with normal footware. He was in a movie with Anthony Quinn. Quinn is listed at 6'2 and looked it to me. He and Wayne were standing next to each other and Wayne had him by at least 2 inches. He was 6'4 max or at least 6'3 no shorter. talker says on 27/Feb/08
i saw "north to Alaska" recently,where Wayne looks a good 2" taller than St.Granger.I always thought Granger was 6'2" so that would make Wayne around the 6'4" mark like many people say and he was old there.Also,I saw "Pirrsburgh" where Wayne is young and is an inch taller than Randolph Scott.Scott always looked 6'3" to me.Since i'm one of the people who put Wayne around 6'3" i must say i'm having second thoughts now.BAsicaly what still bothers me is that Stewart looked taller in my mind in
Valance. patrick says on 26/Feb/08
Frankly, will due respect, I always wonder how some people can live in our world without hitting their head everywhere, wounding themselves in putting their shoes on or even simpler daily life things !
I have been so many times paying tribute to my favourite stars in front of the Mann’s Chinese Theatre and, of course, I also saw the famous print.
So what? On one hand you have hundreds of films showing the Duke and on the other hand, two prints showing mainly heels and proving to be quite small. What do you logically conclude? He had to be as a child!
I am speechless and worried in thinking that such a person, making such a testimony, could be a witness in a trial I would be the defendant!
I am concerned too in thinking that the same person will vote soon, basing his choice upon that kind of evidence!
Sorry, I just can’t help writing what I think.
Where did you dig up that story of “elevated grounds” about the Duke! Who is able to claim such a silly argument when it is about a Western Star whom was 70% of his shooting time “full length”!
Just one word about “the” Hollywood prints: you can observe the same phenomenon with many hand prints. Some arguably “big hands” stars seem here having much smaller hands than the average.
That comes from how hard they pushed down them, whether they did care or not, and how wet was the cement. Everybody knows that…or almost everybody!
Hope both of my dear Gonzalo and mike c are reading that! grammy61 says on 25/Feb/08
I have heard he was shorter than reported and always walked on elevated ground and after viewing his foot prints in Hollywood really started to wonder. If he had worn an 11" shoe why are his foot prints so small? Looks like they belong to a small child. patrick says on 25/Feb/08
I agree with you paul but...I don't know what the heck you are taking about!
As far as I know, even the most stubborn people here never have imply such a stupidity! paul douglas says on 22/Feb/08
What kind of idiot would say John Wayne was 5'6"? I'm 5'8" and Wayne was a hell
of a lot taller than me. mike c says on 18/Feb/08
Gonzalo, Patrick. just viewed Hondo. Especially waited for the confrontation between Wayne and Arness. Well,boys, only a 2-3 inch diff. between the two as they stood face to face...Duke with boots and Arness with at least 1-2 inch heels.....love it! Do the math: The Duke with 2 inch boots, 6'6"; Arness with at least 1.5" heels....6'8+...it's there guys!...OH, I forgot, the Duke was wearing 6" lifts. Take care. Mike patrick says on 18/Feb/08
Dear Mike, I already have it! That's why I can talk about it. I invite you to get to the special features and hope you will have the one about James Edward Grant: captivating! a lot of teaching stuff for sure.
Eager to read your comments Mike! Good to read you again "here", anyway! mike c says on 16/Feb/08
Just bought Hondo at Barnes and Noble, Patrick. I'm sure you, Gonzalo, can purchase it on line from them....I've never seen the movie, but am looking forward to seeing it tonight. Take care, amigos. Mike mike c says on 15/Feb/08
Hi Gonzalo& Patrick!! Saw a movie a few yrs.back with the Duke and Arness standing face to face in suits and dress shoes....can't remember the title..in fact, I wrote a post about it quite a while ago...you're both right, face to face, only 2-3 inch difference...Arness was 6'7"/Duke 6'4.5"..will write to both of you soon. Take care. Mike C ps someone out there must have a picture of Arness and Wayne.. patrick says on 14/Feb/08
Dear friend, Gonzalo: very hard to me to pick up a picture from a DVD! I just do not know how to do it if any possible!
Hondo was "off" for decades as were some 50ies' Hitchcok's movies.
quite easy to find it out by now and really worthwhile!
Good film and great actors! Gonzalo says on 14/Feb/08
THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION, PATRICK. I HAVEN´T SEEN HONDO. ARNESS WAS HUGE. I GUESS A 1`85 MAN WOULD BE DWARFED BY A 2 METER MAN AND, AS YOU SAY, THAT WASN´T THE CASE. AND IT WASN´T THE CASE BECAUSE JOHN WAYNE WAS OVER 1`90. COULD YOU TAKE A PICTURE OF SOME SHOTS OF BOTH MEN TOGETHER? THAT WOULD BE USEFUL. patrick says on 12/Feb/08
I watched "Hondo" yesterday and it was obvious that he was very tall at the time.
There is a scene where he and James Arness confronted each other: there are exactly, I mean really precisely, two inches between maximum between them for James.
I actually, would be inclined to just see one inch if I did not know how tall was James, namely 6’7 (which has never doubted).
Don’t forget that James Arness was under contract to Wayne for three years and four movies. The Duke likes him very much and I don’t know why he would have hire such a tall man, visibly taller than him, if his height were at the time as important as some people say here; I mean so important that John would have needed to wear lifts, just to remain shorter anyway, than a “secondary player”!
In the bonus, very interesting one, everybody talks about “him” as not only a great actor, a great producer but also and above all, a great Man!
It is said that he was the favourite of all the co stars and the Mexican crew, thing very known but for “some ones”!
Besides, I invite you to discover that nice western whose last battle scenes were directed by John Ford, John Farrow having had to leave to start another film!
What a time, good heavens! patrick says on 17/Jan/08
"people curse when they run out of intelligent things to say": what could I add?
As for Cooper06, no way he can be related to the great Gary!
See you fella! mike c says on 16/Jan/08
Hey guys, I didn't realize BillyBob had 2 brothers..triplets!!...it's amazing how all three cannot post without degrading, cursing, and just plain showing their ignorance. Stewart was 6'3" when he died....Wayne might have lost some height after the horrendous surgeries he had to endure, but he's just as tall as Jimmy or taller in the Shootist ( and they're both wearing boots). Patrick, you're right on! will write shortly. Gonzalo, just bought Dakota..Wayne with Mike Mazurki (6'5-6")..there's a scene with both of them face to face with dress shoes on..of course the triplets think lifts....I guess if their remote control had a pause button/slow button and they used a DVD, they might just see where our logic is. But, that would be too easy and just might burst their bubble...Gonzalo is also right, I bougth Donavan's Reef in Dec. and there is not doubt whatsoever Wayne was at least 2" taller than Marvin (6'2")...No offense meant Cooper06 (are you related to Gary Cooper?), but you just might have to learn how to read and use more intelligent language than just plain invectives!! You see, people curse when they run out of intelligent things to say!!! patrick says on 16/Jan/08
You definitely give too many proves cooper06! Stop! Please!
What an argument! Wow,
When I think all that time lost just because not being put in front of your comment!
Mike c, Gonzalo and I are completely overwhelmed!
Do you really think it is enough to state “he wore this, he did that” to make that true?
My best advice: you and some others as Billy Boy and Chuck ought to open a club. I already have name: “obstinate blind guys”.
Let me tell you all you have no idea of what proportions are if not, you would see a guy like him could not be shorter than 6’2.5 to the extreme “low” limit and reasonably not less than 6’3.
People as those I mentioned are those who deliberately, Stalinialy, want at all coast see what they decided to see!
We explained here that if he ever wore lifts, it was “after” 1964, having undergone a surgery operation which would probably have killed you under the knife!
Even admitting he did so, lifts as you describe and which “we” spent hours to prove they are NEVER visible, are so high that a man wearing them could have barely able to walk!
Only “Dames” can do it and they do not run nor ride horses with them!
Back to the proportions: I do not need to see a man next to another to gauge him give or take one or 1.5 inch. I don’t say I can see “exactly” how tall he is but I know ho short he definitely cannot be!
As I said many times right here: this is a serious site; no need to spoil it with personal positions
Are you too short or to tall? I don’t care how taller a man is; he is what he is and until “you” won’t bring real and positive, indubitable proofs, please, do not say things which only can turn their authors ridiculous. Gonzalo says on 16/Jan/08
I saw recently Donovan`s reef, made in 1963. Wayne looks 5-6 cms taller than Lee Marvin, who is listed here 1`88. Wayne is wearing sneakers. Where are the four-inch lifts in this pic? He also appears barefoot and doesn`t look 10 cms shorter.
Cooper06, if that is a fact, why are there no evidences? cooper06 says on 15/Jan/08
Duke Wayne wore 4 inch lifts in the 60`s to look 6-4! That`s not an opinion, that`s not an stupid trash post, that`s a goddamn fact! He looked 6-4 in the 60s, didn`t he? No shorter, but also not particularly taller. And he STILL used 4 inch lifts. 6`4"- 4" inch lifts and we have.... oh my god! Yes, Wayne lost height in the early 60s and therefore used lifts but mark my words... He was NEVER six foot four inches tall. glenn says on 10/Jan/08
i have a lost pic with howard and in dress shoes he was an inch taller than me.unless i was 5-7 then.which is possible.but howard has been listed at 5-9. patrick says on 10/Jan/08
Catsman, I live in France where TV is saved only with US and British shows.
Some documentaries are, now and then , interesting because they always are foreign (mostly from the Anglo-Saxon countries!).
Cable delivers US movies which help but as far as I am concerned, TV is “the way to watch DVD or tapes” and series as Smallville, Law & Order, Monk and that’s all!
The quiet man is a MASTERPIECE I watched maybe 15 times or more since I was a little boy.
I got it on tapes and then on DVD for many years. I try to buy all the classics available including, of course, John Wayne’s movies.
In France, 40 years ago, we had a lot of if it’s not “all” the westerns aired on TV. Indeed, it was on small screens and in B&W but, thanks to them, I not only dreamt but I also travelled through space and time!
I “lived” what it could only be for me, “something from out there”, as if it was for real.
John Wayne, Kirk Douglas, Robert Mitchum, Burt Lancaster and so many others made me believe “another way of “existing”” was possible, that other values than in my “small” country existed!
John Wayne had the most impact on us, on me. He was as broad and tall and with a look as deep and human as his country was noble and wide, large, big, infinite!
Since those days, I have been so many times there I can say here, that was true: John Wayne just carried on his shoulders and in his soul all what was such a country as the USA were and still are despite “modern times”.
I really hope you will be able to watch “the quiet man” because it is not only a very funny movie; it is far more than that! It is about what human being really is as in the Shakespeare’s “Taming of the shrew”!
All the characters are deeply creative and true, made of flesh and soul but Wayne towers them not only for he was taller than anyone else there but because “he” was from another dimension.
His match was Maureen O’Hara that beautiful and gorgeous actress who was lucky enough to be her best friend!
Enjoy your future watching!. clark says on 10/Jan/08
Ron Howard is closer to 5'8--maybe a hair under. Anson "Potsie" Weber was the tallest of the famous four-at almost 5'11. While Henry Winkler did the best to stretch out of his 5'6 and "1/2" inch frame, probably more like 5'5. Not to mention the motorcylce boots. Tom Bosley listed at 5'7 or so was just a tad bit shorter than his tv son, while Ralph Malph also calimed he was 5'11, but appeared shorter than Potsie. Scott Baio lean out at about 5'10 or so, and left all of them behind, except for Potsie. Not to mention that "Chachie" was always wearing white converse all-stars. Bruno says on 9/Jan/08
John Wayne was a legend, At least 6 4 in his hey day. Catsman says on 9/Jan/08
MIke C - regarding your December 29th post, I haven't seen The Quiet Man yet but I will when it comes on next. Was it on over Christmas? I live in England and content myself with the 5 regular analogue channels (the limted bandwidth given to the digital channels really ruins a lot of programs - I guess they want us all to pay for HD) so I'll sit tight until it comes on again. Happy New Year! patrick says on 9/Jan/08
CLARK: why are you telling me I have to read mike c "more carefully"? I am proud to claim I consider him as a friend and I say he is right. What you say is respectable but thinking that John Wayne « because starring » had to be taller is…naïve. Sorry!
In “the man who shot Liberty Valence”, they are BOTH stars; at the time Jimmy was the Duke’s match about starring a movie!
Wayne appeared many times in movies with people taller than him while much less known than him!
Fro example, he became friend with an almost “extra” named James Arness who was 3 inches taller or so. Anybody can see Arness is taller in the four films he made with “Him”.
When a star is “A” star, he can be “short” as were James Cagney, E.G. Robinson, Alan Ladd or even Humphrey Bogart.
Of course, Hollywood is the world of “illusion” but not so in the John Wayne or Jimmy Stewart case.
Anyway, being “too tall” has always and much more now, been a disadvantage as confirm other tall actors who never could become the stars they could and should have been as Clint Walker, Arness or today, Adam Baldwin or Vince Vaughn (relegated to comic roles while he is a fine actor), D’Onofrio, M. Modine.
Many have to assure they career in acting in TV shows while very poor acting guys as Colin Farrel, Mark Wahlberg or so (too) many others get the title role !
I agree with you and thank you to grant the grandeur of those actors who, in my opinion, have no match nowadays (except Tom Welling I confess being a “fan” of!)
On the contrary, being broad shouldered can be a disadvantage depending the length of your neck, your proportions, notably concerning your head.
Thank you anyway for your interest and your style. clark says on 8/Jan/08
Patrick: you need to read a bit more careful. Mike C was saying that Wayne appeared taller. And in some instances he does, but remember the Duke was the star, and your jaw would drop if you could see what there demands are before filming a movie. I have the utmost respect for John Wayne, but Hollywood is about allusion, and keeping heroes-- always looking like heroes. In the early days of Tom Selleck-- he was kept out of certain pictures because he towered over the "stars."
The photo at the academy awards show Jimmy A lil bit taller than the "Duke,"
and I have always thought Jimmy Stewart's build very similar to Pierce Brosnan, and John Wayne had the massive shoulders that can take the appearance of height away. Either way, may they both rest in peace. glenn says on 7/Jan/08
ron howard is 5-9. glenn says on 7/Jan/08
makes sense mike b.i just cant understand how a 6-3 or 6-4.5(which i have read back in the day) guy would wear lifts in the first place.some say he was 6ft.5.i think its clear he was at least 6-3,and very possibly 6-4.im no wayne expert however.he kinda reminds me of steven seagal on how seagal can look 6-5 to me,and me trying to figure out how much its in the boots. patrick says on 7/Jan/08
Once more, mike c is right: Jimmy Stewart made only two movies with the Duke.
In the first one, “The man who shot Liberty Valence”, depending the scenes, he appears as tall as Wayne, a tad taller as in the saloon scene or even shorter as in the “steak scene”.
As for the last Wayne movie, he looks a bit shorter as in the street scene.
Anyway, those men were tall and great and respecting unto each other, feeling which seems not being the strong point of Billy Bob.
That one must suffer from I don’t know what to be so relentlessly bitter and fierce towards John Wayne.
The more a man is mean, nasty and insulting in his terms, the more he shows how small he is and I don’t mean here small in height!
Hatred is always ridiculous and is not even valid for sick people as terrorists, all the more reason for actors!
We do not ask anybody to like people we ourselves like or love but simply to remain decent and not a gossip spreader!
Psychoanalysts have a job for long and I feel happy for them, until such time Billy Boblike people keep existing and writing and speaking or rather, “tossing words” which seems better suit him.
The fact we all are able to freely expose our opinions must oblige us to take care of “how” we do it more than if it was when talking among friends.
We all have to raise our level of education in such a site otherwise it becomes a mess, which is not thanks to Ed Rob.
So, Clark and even Scott B see John Wayne differently than us but they are exactly as “members” of this site are supposed to be.
“If you don’t like it, don’t gross out the others”!
I agree Scott B about Ron Howard who was more than 5’8, at least at the time, being dwarfed by a barefoot John Wayne. That means something, no?
Besides, it is true that A. Quinn was much shorter than Wayne in his prime!
Seeing him at less than 6’3 is the fact of reductionist people, at least for me! clark says on 7/Jan/08
Funny I saw early pics of the Duke, and I saw a wee bit of Conan O Brien. Then again, they are both of Irish decent, and tall. mike c says on 6/Jan/08
Clark,Scott B, in the Shootist, when Wayne and Stewart are walking out of his office you get a clear look at both of them and their boots....hit the pause button a few times so they go in slow motion.....Wayne is taller. Appreciate your opinion. mike c says on 6/Jan/08
Buttkis...hmm. very original. Krhm? Don't know what that means, but I'm sure if must be a compliment....Happy New Year BillyBob. Scott B. says on 6/Jan/08
Even if John Wayne wore lifts, I beleive he was 6'3 barefoot. He had a habit of slouching when in scenes with Jimmy Stewart. I have seen Wayne in a movie with Anthony Quinn who is listed at 6'1 in his prime. Wayne and Quinn were wearing normal footware and Wayne was taller than Quinn by 2 inches. John Wayne was 6'3 Barefoot. Like I said before watch the Movie the Shootist. There is a scene where he is Barefoot with Ron Howard. Howard being 5'8, 5'10 in Boots was 5 or 6 inches shorter than Wayne. Glenn...What do you think? clark says on 6/Jan/08
Jimmy Stewart always appeared taller than Wayne,and Jimmy was listed at 6'3 1/2... mike c says on 4/Jan/08
BillyBob...I know your're trying, but you're not getting better. I see neither your eyesight nor your intellgence has improved..so write away as I'm just going to delete what you scribble... as I do with all the other junkmail I read. BillyBob says on 4/Jan/08
Way to go buttkis... krhm.. mike c!
Now about Waynse. Well, he was indeed a big man with his 6`2" frame. But... He had small feet and wore lifts to look 6-4. And those pictures.... rubbish. Are there any pictures where he is barefoot with another tallish man and you can see that Waynse doesn`t have any footwear advantage? I dont think there are any... Because Duke Wayne was a racist, homophobic, coward who had small feet and no good brains. mike c says on 3/Jan/08
Editor Rob, your dad sounds like a very intelligent man....one with very good taste and judgement, I might add.....good for him. mike c mike c says on 2/Jan/08
Hey Gonzalo, no offense taken...you're a good man and I respect you as I do Patrick....I guess I missed a post or two as I thought Patrick lived in the Good Ol' USA..no matter, I still respect him and I think he's very intelligent, but above all, very insightful..he and you exhibit a lot of common sense when it comes to posting comments about the Duke....you're both well read and have definitely done your homework. Anyway, Happy New Year to you, and all of the Duke's fans....ps, Patrick, if you want, contact Gonzalo and he'll give you my address..thanks also, Ed. Rob....this is the best site of all....mike c Gonzalo says on 2/Jan/08
Hi, Patrick. I hope not to offense Mike C and other americans saying that I would rather live in Paris than in the US. I love the US but I feel strongly European and I specially love France and Paris.
I hope you`re doing Ok Patrick cause you sounded a bit blue in your last post. I´m sorry you are in the middle of a family problem.
I thought you were american but lived in France. Now I see you`re French. Your English looks perfect to me. You can contact me in tenientezip@yahoo.com.
Thanks Rob for letting us use this page to keep in touch. patrick says on 2/Jan/08
My friends, I am SOOO touched with your words, words I insist to share, as Gonzalo does, with our mutual host: Ed.Rob without whom we never could have been able to communicate!
I want to believe that our mutual love for the Duke actually is the proof of something else, of something higher than just “a fan’s fondness” for a man, as great (and tall) he could be.
Our respective admiration covers what John Wayne symbolized beyond his immense ability to embody so different characters. He first and foremost was “A” man and being so, “The” Man as he ought to be now, if “he” (the man) does not want soon to be “ridiculized” by the “monkey next door”!
In loving John Wayne, “we” love him and all what he stood for: reality of what a man can be and is to be.
John Wayne is the exact contrary of a CGI character!
You know, I live in France, in Paris and find there is a gap between my country and the USA.
I go to New York City and to the West every year.
My best “auto-wish” for 2008 (mean a wish for myself!) is to meet you sometime with Gonzalo because we certainly do have a lot to talk about together!!!
So, if you know how to let me pass you on my personal e-mail address, that would be real great and I mean super, gorgeous, marvellous!
You know, I am 55 this very year and I wish I’d be able to settle down (legally) in America at least when I retire, in 5 or 6 years (depending changing French laws!).
Not to “take advantage of America” but just because I love that country more than myself (not hard!) and than anything else; because I love being “there”, breathing “your” air and that’s all.
I say that just to explain to you why I love John Wayne!
He was and still remains almost thirty years after his death, that beautiful, “dream maker” continent himself as would say a crying Maureen O’Hara before the Congress.
So, if a man was ever the incarnation of his country, that certainly is “Him”, John Wayne, a man as big as the nature he contemplated on the top of a hill at the beginning and the end of “Chisum”!
A Man who never could have been “only” 6’2…even though I am personally around 5’8 (but very proud of staying slender and wearing 31 jeans and 17.5 shirts!)
So, may all of you have a good, a great year despite what the human race is always doing to contradict that wish.
And for both of you Gonzalo and Mike C, may 2008 be full of what you dream of because, That is the only thing which can make our lives really beautiful!
Unfortunately, I henceforth, am single again (my ex- wife living in Florida!) and I feel glad to know you are happy fathers, what I never succeeded in doing while wishing it so hard!
Looking forward reading you soon Fellows!
[Editor Rob: my Dad got a John Wayne calendar from me and some of his dvd's...he loves the old Wayne movies.] Gonzalo says on 2/Jan/08
Happy new year to everyone, especially Mike C, Patrick and editor Rob! Patrick, it would be a pleasure to meet you, as well as Mike C. Mike and I know each other a little more, since we write each other by e-mail. You live in France, don´t you? I guess it is not easy for us to meet since we live in different countries. Anyway, we share our love for John Wayne and we have this site to communicate. Take care mike c says on 31/Dec/07
Great to read you again, Patrick. I was getting worried about you and almost wrote Gonzalo to see if he knew why you weren't contributing.....Gonzalo and I know each other's identity.....he's in Spain and I'm in New Jersey..eastern USA..the best country in the world albeit with many flaws, but it still allows me to post what I want....and millions of people flock here, illegally and legally, year after year...I wonder why? Gonzalo is a gentleman, a young one at that. He's a proud father and, I can sense, a man that loves his family. You appear to exhibit similar qualities though a "tad" older. The Duke was indeed a flawed man, yet his heart and love for life, his country, his children are enviable...he's one of my heroes and the more I research him, the more I can identify with him...though I'm only 5'6" and have only 2 beautiful daughters....his love for his children, his dedication to his art, and yes, he was indeed a great actor....he was a natural...just watch him in action...really watch him as he speaks and totally convinces you he is the man he's portraying on the screen. I kown Gonzalo,a true Duke fan, will wholeheartedly agree. Scroll down, Patrick, and view his album..it's getting to be quite an eye-opener for all the "fans" that still insist Wayne was at best 6'tall....It would indeed be great if we could have a glass of wine/beer together in memory of the Duke....who knows, maybe I live in the same town you do...maybe we can exchange e-mail addresses soon....if only to share pics and chat about our mutual friend....Happy New Year to you, your family, and of course, Gonzalo.and all the other Duke fans..mike c patrick says on 31/Dec/07
Guys: "I'm back!" I was far from any civilization so couldn’t read and reply but, I certainly can now!
First, mike c, I insist on thanking you once more for saying such warm and decent, human words: I am very touched and you know what? I dream, one day, sometime we, Gonzalo you and I could be able to meet up in flesh and bones before I pass away!
In truth, I can say I don’t exaggerate in saying it is so rare to find exactly this humanity our world is missing so much, now more than ever!
Our days are not so hard but they are “grey” and with such a lack of what precisely “we” found in men as John Wayne were (probably because the three of us as Chris and Scott ant some others are damned racists!).
So, what a contrast between your words and those of the hateful Chuck!
I sincerely complain him not because of his awkward position but in relation to “how” he hopes to make us share it!
Gonzalo, you are very funny too and I’d just would add “the Billy Bob’s twin” is EXACTLY what he pretends to accuse the Duke to be: intolerant and condemnatory without any need of a trial.
I am from a country which does the same all the time as would do ex-USSR. Always for the best “moral” reasons!
Example: Chuck treats the Duke as mud, not to say “worse” and there is nothing to say, to try in order to enlighten him: “He knows”!
Those people spend their time in fiercely attacking and condemning those who represent at their eyes the symbols of, for them, a dead America.
America of big cars, cow boys, country music, is racist, old fashioned, out, hateable: Wayne or Walt Disney are her symbols;
Europe with manual transmissions Volvos (or Asian matches), boring movies about “couple or/and sexual problems” and monotonous talkative actors are so much more great, intellectually rewarding!
What a tissue of b….its I could hear, mainly in East States of the USA!
So many people founded on their certainty of being morally “right” do not want to waste their time in listening to “our” poor, silly and so naïve arguments!
They just have a compassionate smirk in hearing them.
Briefly, they condemn people (even though dead ones!) for being what they are but as “knights of “The” right way to think!
Oddly, James Stewart, a man and an actor I positively love, is very rarely accused of being racist or so by those same people, while he was worst than John Wayne in that delicate domain!
Presumably, the fact he did some movies with Frank Capra helped him to keep the respect of “good thinking” people!
What is ridiculous in that “affair” is the way of diminishing a man also regarding his physique!
That “Billy Bob’s twin” probably does not find enough to slander the Duke’s name and got the need to shrink him.
That is hate! I do not particularly like some “new” actors as Tom Cruise, Colin Farrell, Brad Pitt or G. Clooney I feel insipid (above all because they play “heroes” or Cary-Grantlike seducers – Clooney) but It never could come to my mind to utter insane and nasty false thinks just to try to persuade “others” how right I am in my judgment!
That’s precisely what Clooney did, this “paragon of virtue”, full of peace in his heart (as so many others) when he nastily joked about the Charlton Heston’s disease.
OK, you got it! Now, let’s talk a second about John Wayne.
It is true that he was taller than anyone but James Arness, a giant or Hudson because he was already quite old and above all, affected with his cancer aftermaths.
But realizing that needs, it is true, to use a very expensive tool: “eyes”!
And by the way, about his “homophobic tendency”, let’s recall how he considered the great Monty Clift while knowing perfectly what his penchants were!
John Wayne never “left him in his shadow” and, as eventually did Clint Eastwood in many movies, do not put himself first as the star he was!
Take Rio Bravo, Hatary and so many other movies he shares with all the other actors.
People loved to work with him but Don Siegel in his last film because John was a bit like Kirk Douglas or Burt Lancaster: they forgot they were not “the” director!
Be that as it may, have a good last 2007 night and especially you mike c and Gonzalo!
Eager to write to you in 2008! mike c says on 29/Dec/07
Scott, from my Oct 8 post: Catsman, if you indeed saw The Quiet Man, maybe you missed three important scenes. The one with Victor McLaglen in the widow's home where the Duke haggles for his father's property. They're face to face, you get a great shot of the shoes....if you see 4" heels/lifts you are definitely in denial. Earlier in the movie when he's being driven to his hometown in a horse and buggie, you get a good look at the shoes he wears throughout the movie....again, the 4" lifts are no where to be scene.....and the best shot of all, when he's standing in the doorway of his cottage and his wife has gone AWOL, he's barefoot...he's taller than the doorway....I know, they purposely built the cottage to make his look tall....hope you can buy or rent The Quiet Man...mike c Scott says on 29/Dec/07
I don't know why certain people insist that John Wayne was under 6'2. I have watched several of his movies and it is CLEAR he was at least 6'3 barefoot. In his last movie the Shootist, there was a scene where Wayne was Barefoot and Ron Howard had Boots on and Wayne still was at least 6 inches taller. He was NEVER below 6'2. chris says on 25/Dec/07
John Wayne was definately a solid 6'4 1/2, maybe even 6'5" in his earlier years leading up to the 50s. I think he was 6'4 after the mid 50s though. Gonzalo says on 20/Dec/07
Chuck`s opinions could be respectful but he mixed them with insults and that absurd statement that he saw John Wayne barefoot. He lost all credibility saying that. And once again he showed no evidence.
Filiz Navidad Mike c mike c says on 19/Dec/07
Hey Gonzalo! Like your Hudson quote! Of course, you know, we're both wrong. Hudson hated the Duke....that's what I've heard.....I saw the Undefeated again and there just wasn't any chemistry between the giant Hudson and the tiny Duke....go figure!!! mike c says on 19/Dec/07
Hey Gonzalo! Like your Hudson quote! Of course, you know, we're both wrong. Hudson hated the Duke....that's what I've heard.....I saw the Undefeated again and there just wasn't any chemistry between the giant Hudson and the tiny Duke....go figure!!! mike c says on 19/Dec/07
Now, shame on you Gonzalo. How could you say that to our new member, albeit one who is not very articulate nor rational? He can't help it if he can't read or even have the ability to do some original research on his own...Of course, he could scroll down and read about 5 month's worth of intelligent commentary on that dirty, rotten scoundrel Wayne....and maybe, he'll just open up your album with all those doctored pictures of the very small and racist Duke...No, that would indeed be too easy!..Just let him shoot of his mouth....we all need a good laugh after a hard day's work at the ranch! Feliz Navidad, amigo. En este mundo aun los locos tienen derecho. Gonzalo says on 19/Dec/07
Glenn said once a sentence that I liked and I want to borrow it now and dedicate it to Chuck: `go get some friends`. Chuck says on 19/Dec/07
"I did a movie with Duke Wayne and was very surprised to find out he had small feet, wore lifts, and a corset. Hollywood is seldom what it seems." -Rock Hudson AFTER he had met the dark side of John Wayne. A racist, homophobic, conservative old fool. mike c says on 18/Dec/07
Chuck sounds like Billy Bob's twin!...from John Wayne, The Man Behind the Myth, pages 290-291:the Duke states...." We had Rock Hudson, one of the most professional guys I ever worked with" When asked about Rock, the Duke replies, "He's a homosexual? Yes, I know. Who the hell cares if he's queer? The man plays great chess. We had many a game up there in Durango. And what a good-looking man. I admit, I couldn't understand how a guy with those looks and that build and the ..manly way he had about him could have been a homosexual, but it never bothered me. Life's too short. It wasn't like some of his type who go around saying, 'Poor me, I'm discriminated against.' He just got on with his life in private, and I never cared to know about it. All I cared about was he was on the set on time every day, and at the end of the day he'd say, 'Care for a little chess, Duke?' and I'd say, 'You wanna get beat again?'"
The author then quotes Hudson who states, "I was grateful to Duke Wayne because my career was going down the toilet at that time"......."John Wayne was then the Hollywood legend, and I was on screen with him, The guy is an angel. He saved my life back then when no other filmaker wanted to know me." The author of the book is Michael Munn.2003 New American Library. I provide This info just in case Chuck and his macho twin, Billy, can read. It's obvious their vision and their ability to understand height is on the wane...5'11.5" my ass! Gonzalo says on 18/Dec/07
It´s funny to think someone saw John Wayne barefoot when he was dying. I guess Chuck saw Wayne at the hospital or maybe at the beach. That last sentence proves Chuck should not be taken seriously.
By the way, I want to repeat again what Rock Hudson said about JW:
"John Wayne was then the Hollywood legend, and I was on screen with him. The guy is an angel. He saved my life back then when no other film maker wanted to know me." Chuck says on 18/Dec/07
Wayne was shorter than Stewart, Ryan, Hudson, Walker, Arness, Heston, Matthau, Eastwood, etc... He wasn`t a goddamn six-four!
He made a couple of movies with Jimmy Stewart and Jimmy was always marginally taller. He made a movie with Robert Ryan who found out what kind of racist asshole Wayne was. Ryan topped him by one inch.
Rock Hudson also found out what Wayne thought about his homosexuality. Well, Rock was clearly taller. Clint ****ing Walker topped Wayne by 3-4 inches. James Arness did the same thing.
Chuck Heston was a legit 6-3 and STILL taller than JW. Only marginally but still. AND the same goes with Walter Matthau who stood completely straight with Wayne in the early 50s. Eastwood topped him by a couple of inches as well.
So my point isn`t to disrespect all JW fans here... just tell the facts. He wasn`t six feet four. No way. Maybe 6-2½ on a very good day in the morning.
And yes... I`ve met Wayne barefoot and he was about 5-11½. But it was the year 79 so.... But still: no more than 6-2½ in his peak. Gonzalo says on 17/Dec/07
Happy Christmas for everyone and happy 2007. Thanks for your comments, MikeC. It is great to have you on board. I hope to find some time this holidays (if I finally get any ) to watch a John Wayne movie. I want John Wayne `s lift shoes for Christmas! mike c says on 16/Dec/07
obviously, I meant to write "their homework" instead of "they're homework"... mike c says on 15/Dec/07
Gonzalo, Patrick, Ed. Rob. Glenn, and all of John Wayne's fans...Happy Holidays and a healthy New Year.....This IS the best site of all and I enjoy reading all the comments, even when they're written after a night of drinking..only kidding..Patrick, you and Gonzalo are the best...except for maybe the contributors who still write without doing they're homework....It makes my day!! patrick says on 12/Dec/07
Mike c, I do love too to read what you, Gonzalo and all the « brave ones », all the good will men can think and declare !
Gonzalo; I agree with you as you know, about “that” so awkward, irrelevant and really ugly (silly too!) supposedly being “the” Charles Lindbergh (sooo bad he loved NAZIS!).
Indeed Gonzalo, in “the spirit of St Louis”, the 6’3.5 Jimmy claims 6’3 as C. Lindbergh.
Mike c, I scrolled down the document and I always recognized “him” while I can’t do it in the “other” pic! Besides, C. Lindbergh always looked tall and even far more when landing in France where, at the time, people were much shorter than Americans and Germans!
Anyway, he was tall and I cannot find again a photo where he’s seen with Howard Hugues, 6’4 and looked exactly similar in height.
As for Primo, I also always heard of him as being 6’7 and never less.
Look at the pic with Joe Louis who always looked tall and so broad shouldered and thick, muscular and nice too!
Here, he seems clearly thinner even though he could have killed Primo in probably one round!
I think Primo was unable to use his real strength. This guy was nice and not mentally ready to be a fighter. Maybe the Duke could have beaten him too! The tallest boxer for sure but one of the weakest, despite his imposing musculature.
He could “open up” a horseshoe just by putting it around his biceps!
If not done yet, watch the great “Bogey’s last movie” – “harder they fall” about “a” fake Primo Carnera. Instructive and edifying if ever!
Anyway, John Wayne is the member of this page and I wish he looks at us, we who love him throughout ages!
That aside, let me wish you a merry Christmas and a happy new year, just in case I would not have the time tomorrow (after, I leave!)
For you too Ed Rob and all who take part in this fascinating site!
[Editor Rob: enjoy your holidays patrick.] Gonzalo says on 12/Dec/07
Hi, guys. In The Billy Wilder film Spirit of Saint Louis James Stewart (who plays Lindbergh) says something about his height and from what I remembered it was around 6`3. Mike C, I can add the pic with Carnera. It is a good one. I remember reading years ago that Carnera was the tallest boxer at around 2 meters. I see now that it was a bit less thatn that, around 1`97.
I don´t think that guy is Lindbergh. That´s an ugly man mike c says on 11/Dec/07
AS, your site for Carnera is great! I love the Wayne pic...he's certainly not dwarfed by Primo...both in suits, except maybe, just maybe, the Duke is wearing boots with 4" lifts....LOL...You've got to love Google....I'm adding this photo to my album...how about it, Gonzalo? Patick, go the Lindberg site and scroll down to the photo of Lindberg in a pilot's hat....compare to the AS photo...maybe days without shaving, no sleep, no sex, can have that affect on a man....I'm reading that Lindberg was max 6'2", not 6'4" and maybe that's why we're confused..we're expecting a much taller man....take care guys. love reading what you write. patrick says on 11/Dec/07
Be that as it may, That is Primo and he definitely was huge with a giantlike physique.
I am 100% sure it is not Lindbergh on the pic, absolutely sure! He was taller and above all, even later, very handsome. He looked like Patrick Mc Goohan but in more "German" (Hardy Kruger way). I am a painting fan (mainly classic one) and a good artist myself. No way it is Charles Lindbergh!
Anyway, that is interesting since we so have the opportunity to talk about our dear Duke!
I just read, while writing, your mike c last comment and saw your photos: Lindbergh looks, for me, the same any which pic it is, and he looks even old, very handsome!
Frankly, unless this pic with Primo is particularly disadvantageous for "the other", I can buy such a funny face being that great pilot's one!
I doubt Colin Farrell or Pitt or Clooney will ever generate such a discussion in 30 years! |
