|
richinkle says on 18/Feb/10
Candice, I stayed out of Lucille Ball's life when she was actually alive. It wasn't until she died that I decided to enter her life.
candice kimbley says on 16/Feb/10
wat is up with this site who cares about how tall people are all these celebreties are just normal people who probably want us to stay out of their lives!!!!! richinkle says on 27/Aug/09
I had heard that her feet gave her trouble as well, which is why she tended to wear flat shoes a lot. Some times, within the same scene, I have noticed a shoe change from high heel to flats.
I never noticed her being pidgeon-toed, but a little bit the opposite - duck footed. Perhaps she pointed her toes out to compensate for her tendency to be pidgeon toed. Frank2 says on 27/Aug/09
Well, I saw Lucy on several occasions over a period of at least twenty-five years and never did she ever appear to be 5'11" in heels. The tallest I saw her was perhaps 5'9" in heels. Lucy hated really high heels. I believe her feet gave her trouble. I noticed she was slightly pigeon toed. richinkle says on 26/Aug/09
I also agree with you, Frank, that Vivian Vance was about 5'-6". Lucille Ball was about an inch taller.
Click Here
Watch this youtube clip. At about 0:12 LB stands straight up and looks at least 3" taller than VV, Her heels are at least an 1 1/2" higher as well. In the rest of the scene, she her shoulders hunch and she's never quite that tall again.
If you look later in the clip, when she's dancing with Van Johnson, she is no more than 3-3 1/2" shorter, with about a 2-2 1/2" heel advantage. If he's standing 6'-1", 6'-2" in shoes, she's nearly 5'-11" in her shoes. She has to be at least 5'-7". (I won't insist on the 1/2" any more.) richinkle says on 25/Aug/09
I agree with you that Katherine Hepburn and Carol Burnett were about the same height - 5'-6"ish. LB was about an inch taller than both. I think Ball and Andrews were both about 5'-7". I won't insist on the extra half inch any more. Frank2 says on 25/Aug/09
Hard to know what each woman wore as far as heels. Julie usually wears lower heels. I met and spoke with her at a screening of THE SOUND OF MUSIC when Fox restored it making a brand new 70mm print. Her heels were no more than two inches. I seemed to tower over her. Carol Burnett is no more than 5'6". richinkle says on 25/Aug/09
Interesting about Kim Novak. I wouldn't have expected that.
Altho, Lucille Ball was taller in comparison to Carol Burnett (Lucy was at least an inch taller) than Julie Andrews, who was almost exactly the same height. So, if Julie Andrews was 5'-7" at her peak, then so was Lucy at least this height. Frank2 says on 25/Aug/09
Well I saw Lucy wearing all kinds of shoes and she slouched like we all do, but she also stood up straight. She was about 5'6" which as I said was tall for women back then. Katherine Hepburn was shorter than her bio states. Probably 5'5.5" to 5'6". No way was she 5'7" or as some claim, 5'8". But again at 5'6" she was much taller than just about all of her contemporaries.
Over the years I met many famous people. With few exceptions, they were all shorter than their listed height. This was especially true with actresses. Today it's a completely different story. Actresses are mostly Amazons. I'd see casting sessions going on at Fox and outside in the hallway would be all these girls, many of them near my height. Some even taller. The funny thing is, the actors hired weren't all 6'4" guys. Mostly men around 6'. Some shorter.
Now a taller actress than you'd think was Kim Novak. She was every bit as tall as Lucy and could have even been slightly taller. Also on the tallish side was Doris Day. Then there was Audrey Hepburn who was 5'7". Julie Andrews who was 5'7". A really tall actress was British Margaret Leighton who was darn near 5'10". The shortest actress I ever met was Gloria Swanson. I doubt she was no more than 4'11". Debbie Reynolds was also tiny. Elizabeth Taylor was quite short. But she made up for it in other ways. richinkle says on 24/Aug/09
I think she aged quite a bit after her stroke. I also think posture can affect a person's height quite a bit.
I have been a very keen observer of LB for over 40 years, having seen all her movies and tv shows, numerous, numerous times. She had a habit of leaning and slouching in a way that makes her look about 2" shorter. She does this ALL THE TIME. In one scene in "Without Love" she looks about 1" shorter than Katherine Hepburn. Then, suddenly, she stands up straight and she's about an 1"- 1 1/2" taller.
Click Here
Check out what happens around 5:10. The whole scene she appears to be standing in a slight ditch, or just standing a little slumped with one heel turned. A second later she's 2" taller. She does this ALL THE TIME - perhaps the few times you met her as well. Frank2 says on 24/Aug/09
Thanks. My point was Lucy wasn't this very tall, imposing women that many believe she was. I think part of it was due to her presence. She could light up a room. But then I saw her when she acted as if she was a nobody. The last time I saw her was at Fox when she and her husband Gary Morton were walking towards their office which was up on the second floor in the corner of the administration building. That office now houses the head of TV production. She looked awful. Very drawn and weak. She had to be supported by Morton or she'd have most likely fallen. What got me was the outfit she wore. A tacky blue double-knit polyester pantsuit combo that looked like she'd had it since the 1970s. At that time she seemed to have lost a couple of inches, but it could have been due to bad posture. I felt sorry for her. Morton drove a fancy Rolls Corniche convertible with his initials on the door. richinkle says on 23/Aug/09
That anonymous posting below is mine. richinkle says on 23/Aug/09
That anonymous posting below is mine. Anonymous says on 23/Aug/09
Thanks for the photos and recollections, Frank2. You've been gone for a while....glad to see you back - even if we don't agree on LB's height......I think our difference has gone down to about 1/2" (5 -6 1/2" to 5'-7"). Frank2 says on 21/Aug/09
I met her many times. Her mother and my grandmother were friends and belonged to the Motion Picture Mother's Club. Lucy was about 5'6". It's just that actresses of her vintage were mostly shorter, especially when compared to the amazons we have today. Back then, 5'6" was pretty tall for a woman, especially an actress. In high heels she was at least 5'9". Had she been 5'7.5", in heels she'd have appeared to be nearly 5'11" and that wasn't the case. I saw her with flats as well as with high heels. I was always a lot taller and I'm 5'11". Desi Arnaz wore lifts on I LOVE LUCY because at best he was 5'9".
Van Johnson wasn't 6'2". He was 6'1". I met him a few times. He was two inches taller than me.
As you can see in this photo, Van is clearly five inches taller than 5'8" Ray Walston and about two inches taller than 5'11" Jeramy Slate:
Click Here
Lucy with 6' Richard Denning:
Click Here
I realize we don't see her feet, but I'd bet she's wearing high heels.
Ball with 5'11" Danny Kaye:
Click Here
If Ball was truly 5'7.5", in heels she'd have been close to the same height as Kaye. That's not the case. Plus watch the films she did with 5'10" Bob Hope before he lost height. Hope is clearly taller even when Lucy wears high heels. This is true in FACTS OF LIFE where Lucy is clearly wearing high heels.
And Vivian Vance who was about 5'6" always looked about the same height as Lucy.
Ball might have been 5'6.5" but that's it. It's that or I'm a lot taller than I think I am.
Here's a great candid shot of Lucy, Desi and family in front of their Beverly Hills residence located on the corner of Roxbury and Lexington:
Click Here
The house is still there, but has been heavily remolded. richinkle says on 20/Aug/09
In this clip from the 1946 movie "Easy to Wed", Lucille Ball tells Van Johnson she's 5 foot 7.
It's at around 0:40 seconds.
Click Here richinkle says on 30/May/09
(The Anonymous posting dating 23/Mar/09 was mine, so please feel free to attribute it to me. I inadvertently neglected to insert my name.)
Lucille Ball is about 1" to 1 1/2" taller than Carol Burnett when they have stood side by side, and danced together, on numerous occasions during the 60's and 70's when Ball was in her mid 50s to early 60s, and Burnett was in her 30s. Here is one scene from "Carol + 2", a 1967 tv special with Lucille Ball and Zero Mostel.
Click Here
In this farewell, they are all standing and swaying and singing side by side (a little after the 6:00 mark). You can't see their footwear, but Carol is clearly wearing flats, and Ball heels, because Ball stands taller next to her than I've ever seen - nearly 4". Assuming Ball has about a 2" to 2 1/2" heel advantage over Burnett, that would make her a good 1"-1 1/2" taller. Zero Mostel looks about 5" taller than Burnett and 1" taller than Ball.
In othe Anonymous says on 23/Mar/09
I actually have that episode on dvd. I think she understated her height. Period. In her later years, in her autobiography, she stated her height as 5'-7 1/2". She's probably somewhere in between. I think on the taller end, though. She stands much taller next to 6'-0" + men than a 5'-6" woman. Closer to where a 5'-8" woman would stand.
Check out this video of her dancing with 6'-2" Van Johnson. Click Here . she's got 3" + heels on, but is no more than 4 1/2" shorter - coming up just past his eyes. When she stands straight up - which she doesn't do much in her comedy, which requires her to be a little smaller - she is surprisingly tall. Watch for yourself. Ball is about as tall next to Johnson as 5'-8" Angela Lansbury in this publicity still from "State of the Union" Click Here{5b9e5ba9-d7bb-493e-be86-20a684ac024e}|{ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff}&qsPageNo=2&fdid=&Area=Search&TotalCount=131&CurrentPos=4&WinID={5b9e5ba9-d7bb-493e-be86-20a684ac024e}
(Lansbury was wearing very high heels in this scene, and practically dwarfed Katherine Hepburn.)
Ball is at least an inch taller than Carol Burnett, Katherine Hepburn, Ann Miller, Vivian Vance and a number of other women listed as 5'-6 1/2" to 5'-7 1/2".
This site must take all sources into account, including the video evidence, of which there is ample for Lucille Ball showing her closer to 5'-8" than 5'-6" in her prime. heyitsliz says on 27/Jan/09
On an episode of The Lucy Show, Lucy is in search of a new roommate (Carol Burnett). At the beginning of the episode, she reads a letter from Carol, and makes the statement, "Oh she sounds just perfect! If she's 5 foot 6 and a half." And Mooney asked her something to the tune of "Why should that matter," and she replied, "Well so we could wear each other's clothes!" Why would Lucy make up a height for herself for the episode, if it weren't true?
Dunno if that has any bearing on the conversation, but there's my addition. :-) richinkle says on 27/Oct/08
Here is a video of Lucille Ball and Carol Burnet (5'-6 1/2") from a 1967 special.
Click Here
55 year old Lucille Ball is clearly about an 1-1 1/2" taller than 32-year old Burnett. They both appear to be wearing similarly high heels.
I remember a Carol Burnet Show question and answer segment from the 1970's where she was asked her height. She responded "5'-7". This would make Ball 5'-8"+
In "Pete and Tillie", Walter Mathau asked Burnett her height, and she said "oh, about 5'6..5'7"
I think, in reality, Burnett at her peak was closer to 5'-6", and Ball was a little over 5'-7". richinkle says on 5/Oct/08
I've seen this before as well, and still cannot reconcile this with my own observation ...(see my January, 22, 2007 entry). Note that her name is spelled "Lucile" which is incorrect. I'm not sure if she filled it out herself, or someone else did it for her. But, as I've noted before, like most tall women, especially during an era that favored shorter women, Lucille Ball likely UNDER-reported her height, in the same way nearly all men OVER-report their height. JT says on 16/Sep/08
Click Here 5'6.5" per her voter registration card in 1936 (age 25). She claimed a relative (uncle or grandfather?) forced her to register as a Communist. richinkle says on 6/Jul/08
I totally agree. There is no way she was less than 5'-7" at her peak. light says on 18/Jun/08
I very much believe she must have been well over 5' 7". I think this needs to be revised. richinkle says on 19/Nov/07
I just saw the youtube of the "Three Little Pigskins", Click Here
the Three Stooges short film from 1934 that featured Lucille Ball. At the end of the reel, with Lucy standing straight up, she's nearly a full head taller than the rest of the cast. CC-Tron says on 3/May/07
Sounds good to me. richinkle says on 2/May/07
The link where Lucie Arnaz notes that her mother was 5'-7 1/2 is Click Here
This should be the last and best word on the subject. richinkle says on 24/Jan/07
I'd love to see that short film, but it's kinda flimsy evidence for you height speculation. I've seen most of her tv and film work, and seen her next to dozens of tv and film stars with better-known heights, and she is clearly in excess of 5'-7". CC-Tron says on 24/Jan/07
She seemed 4 inches taller than the Larry of the Three Stooges in the one short she did with them. Larry's was no taller than 5'3. However she was wearing heels also. I don't think she was any taller than 5'6 barefoot. richinkle says on 22/Jan/07
In the 1960's, in her autobiography, Lucille Ball stated her height as 5'-7.5". Her daughter, Lucie Arnaz, in an "Ask Lucie" website, lists her mother's height as 5'-7.5". Click Here
I would not give more credibility to a 1930's Communist Party voter registration form that lists her height as 5'-6 1/2". The form has her name spelled wrong -"Lucile" - indicating that she did not even fill out the form herself. She also testified that she never voted Communist, and only registered as a Communist to please her Grandfather, who was a devout Socialist and champion of workers.
Like many tall women, especially an aspiring actress in the 1930's when being over 5'-7" was a distinct disadvantage, Lucy likely underreported her height. The tv and movie images of Lucille Ball clearly show a woman over 5'-7", who, if anything, tried to look shorter. You must revise your listing back up. richinkle says on 13/Jul/06
I agree with you Walter completely. Not just about Lucille Ball's height, but also about Lucie Arnaz, whose height was indicated to be between 5'-9" and 5'-10" in a "Here's Lucy" episode with Donny Osmond. She's also a very talented, generous and big-hearted woman. She responds to her fans queries on her "Ask Lucie" website with extremely gracious, thorough and thoughtful answers. She also looks amazing for a woman pushing 55! Walter says on 24/Jun/06
Frank:
Lucie Arnaz height is between 5' 9" and 5' 9.5" .By no means she is shorter than 1,75 cm at all.Can you explain me what do we watch in the so many Here's Lucy episodes ????? They are partenered together, mother and daughter and Lucy is only one inche or one inche and a half shorther than her daughter.
Another thing.Why Lucie Arnaz states in her site that her mother height was 5' 7.5 " ????? With what intention Miss Arnaz would tell a lie about her mother height ? Lucie Arnaz is a very opened and hearty woman, she answers every questions her fans and her mother's fans make to her.What about the Lucy photos taken with Carol Burnett in 1966 and with Shirley MacLaine in 1976 ? Burnett and MacLaine height is 5' 7" and Lucy seems exactly like them with the difference she was more than 20 years older than Burnett and MacLaine.
Waiting for your asnwer.
Thank you Frank2 says on 2/Jun/06
You said it right there with: "I have to see things with my own eyes" Join the club. I've never believed what I've read or been told regarding heights of celebs since almost always when I would see these famous people in the flesh they'd never be the height I expected. Sometimes they really surprised me and were a lot taller. Other times they were shorter and a few times a lot shorter. Few were ever what their publicity claimed them to be. So I can understand your reluctance to accept what I've observed personal and up close. richinkle says on 1/Jun/06
But it's not good enough for me. It's just one ingredient, but not the last word. I have to see things with my own eyes - and I've seen just about every movie and tv appearance of Lucille Ball, and have reached my own conclusion that's she's at least 5'-7" to 5'-7 1/2" (I used to think she was 5'-8", which I read in an article back in the early '70's, but have down-graded that.)
I think your celebrity encounters are fascinating, though, and don't mean to disparage them or you. We'll just have to agree to disagree - it's not the end of the world. I will still enjoy reading your accounts and stories of Hollywood - thank you for them. And I'm glad you're a fan of Lucy's work as well. It shows you have excellent taste :-)
Incidently, I forgot to mention that the photos below with Hepburn, Rogers and Arden are from the movie "Stage Door", 1937. An amazing movie available in many video stores and online. One of Lucy's and Eve Arden's first important speaking roles. And, the dialog is extremely clever, witty, snappy and contemporary. It shows how bold films were before the censorship rules began to tame films after WWII. Frank could probably tell you a lot more about that. Frank2 says on 1/Jun/06
Nonsense. She never leaned. I've seen just about all her films. I saw her in person many times and stood right next to her. She was 5'6" just as it's stated in one of her bios. Her mother and my grandmother would good friends and both were members of The Motion Picture Mother's Club, a group of women who were mothers to celebs. My recollections are clear to me. And that's good enough for me. Frank2 says on 19/May/06
I never saw Hope wearing lifts and I saw him many times over the years. He did tend to stand on boxes when being photographed with tall people as a photo showed that I posted of him with Joe DiMaggio. But he never wore lifts on his TV shows going right up till he retired. Benny didn't seem to wear lifts either. At least not during his later years. He did wear them during his brief movie career.
As for Lucy trying to purposely look short, that's utter nonsense. The woman had excellent posture and stood erect most of the time. I was at a party at the Motion Picture Country Home and stood right next to her when she was wearing flats. She was short enough that I could easily look over the top of her head and she was standing erect and not slumped. Lucy was 5'6". I had a good five inches on her. If she had been 5'7.5" or even 5'7" that wouldn't have been possible.
As for Lucy being a tyrant, well, she knew what she wanted and usually got it. If that pissed off directors then so be it. She was one of the funniest comedians ever. So I'm sure her tenacity proved useful. You have to be strong in this business or you get steamrolled. Frank2 says on 11/May/06
None of whatever you show me explains just one fact. I met her. I even knew her to some extent since my grandmother was good friends with her mother and Lucy was 5'6". That or I've been kidding myself all along and I've been six feet tall. I keep running into people who claim they're 5'11" who are much shorter than me and when I tell them I'm only 5'11" they usually balk saying that can't be true, that I have to be taller. Well, I just measured myself and I got 5'11" so I suspect most folks are just plain full of it when it comes to their height. Lucille Ball at 5'6" was relatively tall. Most actresses back then were under 5'4". Many were just over 5' tall. When Lucy wore high heels she was around 5'9" which is why she towered over many people. That's why Desi wore lifts. He was only 5'9".
Look. I'm finished with this thread. I've said and posted far too much already. I know what I know and that's good enough for me. You go with what you wish to believe. After all, showbiz is mostly make believe anyway. richinkle says on 10/May/06
The images to the right are of Lucille Ball and Eddie Albert. I intended to note that in the movie "Fuller Brush Girl", 1950, Lucille Ball in heels stood about 1" to 1 1/2" shorter than 5'-11" (according to Frank) Eddie Albert in shoes. Therefore, in heels, Lucille Ball was about 5'-10 1/2", or 5'-7 1/2" in stocking feet. (I probably pressed the "clear form" button by mistake.) Frank2 says on 10/May/06
I fail to see what the photos prove. The far left shot is obviously tilted making both Desi and Lucy look taller. On the two right photos, Lucy doesn't look that much taller than Eddie Canter. I take it that's Canter. And in those two blurred photos, Lucy is wearing heels. Frank2 says on 10/May/06
I think you're just as obsessive in pushing that Lucy was at least 5'7". I met her many times and unless I'm taller than I think I am, she was at least five inches shorter than me when she was wearing flat shoes. With heels she was still at least three inches shorter. One problem as I see it is that when I'm measured I stand somewhat relaxed and don't strain to gain as much height whereas most people do exactly the opposite which is to make themselves as tall as possible. I suppose If I did that I could claim I'm 6'. But that's not the way a doctor is supposed to accurately measure someone. But in reality I just think most folks lie about how tall they are. This is especially true with celebs, male as well as female. richinkle says on 9/May/06
Frank, I'm just using your own observations as a reference. According to you, by 1960, Bob Hope and your father both stood about exactly the same height - 5'-9 1/2". I would've thought Hope was about 5'-10", but you have pictures with him and your father, and I'll take your word for it.
As for your obsessive insistence that Lucille Ball was only 5'-6", despite all MY evidence that she was at least 5'-7".....
* No 3" difference in that pic with Lucy and Desi. 2" max, and she's wearing slippers, he's wearing shoes. I've seen WAY too many images of Lucy and Desi side by side where you can see their feet to convince me that they are less than 2" apart in height.
* Lucy looks no more than 5" shorter than Richard Denning, but it's a strange angle, so can't really tell.
* The Cyd Charrisse shot with Lucy, Gene Kelly and company is fascinating. Doesn't show shoes (and by your own account, Cyd Charrisse wore very high heels) or posture. There appears to be some leaning. I can only conclude that they are CLOSE in height.
* The Eddie Cantor picture is bizarre. The image is so small, and she's holding her head back so far you can barely tell it's her (I had to read the caption to find out which one was Lucy). I am enclosing a much clearer image of Lucy and Eddie Cantor where, likely in heels, she hovers about 3 1/2" to 4" above him. I hope Rob will kindly display it :-) Now explain that one. I can hardly wait. ;-)
Frank2 says on 9/May/06
Nope. The photo taken of my dad with Hope on his thread was shot circa 1950 when Hope was 5'10". My father directed Hope in those commercials more than ten years later. By 1960 Hope was no taller than 5'9". You admitted you saw a three inch difference in the shot of Ball and Hope dressed as Santa shot around 1960 so she was 5'6". richinkle says on 9/May/06
The incredible shrinking Hope. Frank, you indicated he was 5'-10" in the picture taken just 5 years earlier. Five years later, you think he's "no more than 5'-9". In the Hope forum, you say "My father even directed Hope in some TV commercials he did to promote some vitamins. That was around 1960. At the time they shot it at a neighbor's home. My father was about 5'9 1/2" so you can see that when the photo was taken which was about 1950, Hope was a little taller. But I have other photos where they appear to be the exact, same height...". So, according to you, Hope was about 5'-9 1/2" in 1960. Ball was about 2 1/2" shorter, or about 5'-7". I still believe at her peak she was closer to 5'-7 1/2". In her films and tv shows, she often towers over her female costars....in a more-than-5'-6" way. She's at least an inch taller than Ann Miller, Katharine Hepburn, Carol Burnett, and Vivian Vance, all of whom claim to be 5'-7". richinkle says on 8/May/06
That anonymous quote was mine....sorry for the confusion. Frank2 says on 8/May/06
By the time of the photo with Hope he was no more than 5'9" so if she was as you admit about three inches shorter then she was 5'6". I saw Hope over the years almost once a year and could see how he shrank. My dad directed him in a TV commercial and by then Hope was slightly shorter than my just under 5'10" father. Somewhere I have a photo of them taken at that time which was around 1961. In earlier photos, Hope was slightly taller. By the late 1960's Hope had lost at least a couple of inches. There's a shot of Hope and Ball taken in the late 1970's where Ball almost is his height. But no matter what photos I publish on this website there will be people who will disregard them and go with what they believe to be true. Anonymous says on 8/May/06
Congratulations, Frank. That Santa Claus photo is a great image, and is actually very helpful in determining relative height. It was probably around 1960 (when "Facts of Life" was being promoted). It shows feet, shows stance. Ball is leaning slightly, and Hope is standing perfectly erect. By my reckoning, Hope is about 3" taller. If you account for Lucy's leaning, he's about 2 1/2" taller. Hope = 5'-9 1/2" to 5'-10", Lucy 5'-7" to 5'-7 1/2". The other two images are interesting, and I love looking at them, but don't really add to the height debate. In the more recent one, you can't even tell if Lucy is standing.
I saw Lucille Ball in Feb, 1988. She was standing straight, and walking without difficulty, and looking lean, tall and elegant. In May of that year, she had a stroke and was partially paralyzed. That's probably when you saw her. Probably not standing very straight, by the sound of it. Hard to base a height estimate under those circumstances. However, she did present at the Academy Awards in March, 1989 with Bob Hope. She had recovered her walking skills somewhat, and was wearing a long gown with a long slit to show off her still-shapely legs. She was also taller than Hope in her heels. I have an image somewhere that I'll send to Rob.
PS - the Teddy Bear is not wearing lifts, but he is being lifted ;-) Frank2 says on 8/May/06
And when I saw her late in her life she wasn't 5'7". More like 5'5". She was walking in slow steps and was being helped along by her husband Gary Morton who she was holding onto or otherwise she'd had most likely fallen. That was only a year or so before she died. richinkle says on 7/May/06
That is a carefully staged still from a scene in which Lucy was playing a boy selling "red hots" at a baseball game. She is posed to look much shorter. If she had been standing straight, on the same level as Bob Hope, she would have been much taller. Frank's in the business, and he knows this. He knows that crates are carefully used to stage images as well. It's a convenient fact that he uses to make his point, but forgets when it doesn't suit his argument. The only certifiable evidence are images that show feet and heels. Not staged stills, not "a biography I read", and not someone's 40 year old recollections. If Lucille Ball is 5'-6", then Katharine Hepburn, Carole Burnett, Vivian Vance, Maureen O'Hara and Ann Miller were no taller than 5'-5". Watch the movies for yourself, don't go by questionable recollections and cherry-picked images.
And, by the way, I saw Lucille Ball in person too. It was right before she died. I was a grad student at Harvard and she was named the "Hasty Pudding Woman of the Year". I waited at the back door for her to emerge along with a small crowd of about 10 people. She stood right next to me for about 20 seconds while people around me told her how much they loved her. She appeared to be about 5'-6 1/2" to 5'-7". She was also 76 years old and had probably shrunk about a inch. I was actually surprised by how tall she looked. But, to be honest, while I believe myself a good judge of height, I don't think my observation is proof of anything, since it's easy to be off by an inch or so in these matters. Frank2 says on 5/May/06
Turner Classic Movies ran two Lucille Ball/Desi Arnaz films tonight. The Long, Long Trailer and Forever Darling. In both films Desi wore huge lifts. In Forever Darling, Lucy was at least four inches shorter than 5'11" James Mason. In those scenes she was wearing at least three inch high heels. When Desi was in a full shot with Mason he was about two inches shorter and that's with his lifts. So this proves to me that Desi was no more than 5'9" and Lucy was no more than 5'6". Forget that I saw them both in person. Just go by their films.
[Editor Rob: actually I've seen 5ft 6 listing for her in the past. Maybe they were right!] richinkle says on 1/Apr/06
ps..Burnett was in her 30's, and Lucy around 60 years old at the time of this photo. richinkle says on 1/Apr/06
Here's a photo of Lucy looking over an inch taller than Carole Burnett, who was 5'-6" to 5'-7" in her prime. Click Here richinkle says on 28/Mar/06
Here is a photo showing 64 year old Lucille Ball looking every bit as tall as 41 year old Shirley MacLaine, who is estimated by Frank2 to be 5'-7" in her prime. richinkle says on 19/Mar/06
Lucille Ball was originally a brunette.
Matheson, who was 19 in the summer of 1967 when Yours, Mine and Ours was filmed, appeared to be the same height as Fonda, at 6'-1". (Matheson ended up marrying his costar in the movie, Jennifer Leak, who played Lucy's daughter Colleen, his step-sister in the movie. They divorced after 3 years.)
But, even in 3/8" house shoes, Lucy never looks more than 6" shorter than Fonda or Matheson in 1" shoes or sneakers. Perhaps we need an independent arbitrator to estimate the difference in height. Someone care to watch the movie and give their estimation of the height difference? It's an excellent flick. Frank2 says on 19/Mar/06
The scene where she's given too much to drink is still hilarious. Did you notice that a still teenage Tim Matheson was already as tall or taller than Henry Fonda?
I noticed that in close up's, Lucy looks taller than in the long shots. In the widest shots such as when she's standing next to Fonda and especially Matheson and Van Johnson she looks to be at least 7 inches shorter.
You still haven't answered why with his lifts on that Desi was the same height as 5'10" Richard Widmark. If he was even 5'10" he'd have looked taller. No, I'm sticking with 5'9" max and no more. No way was he any taller. If anything he could have even been shorter. Those lifts looked like they boosted him by at least two and a half inches. Watch him in Bataan and see how short he is next to 5'10" Robert Taylor. In that film he doesn't even look like he's 5'9". And in that film he doesn't appear to be wearing lifts. richinkle says on 18/Mar/06
Frank, I love that you were watching Yours, Mine and Ours. I think it's one of Lucy's best - if not her absolute best - movie. It was filmed in 1967, around the time of Lucy's 56th birthday). I've just popped in my copy. My perceptions are very slightly different from yours, which underscores the tricky "science" of height estimation.
It's especially tricky in this movie because Lucy's hair is so big - you don't know what's head and what's just hair. (I'm not sure if she wore a wig in this film - she did on most episodes of her later shows to hide the surgical tape she used to smooth out her lines. Because her skin bruised very easily, she never had cosmetic surgery, according to her biographies.) I just assume her eyes are in the center of her head, and estimate accordingly.
In the scenes where she wears her highest heels (2 1/2" - 3") she comes to just above Henry Fonda's eye brow - which at least on my head is about 4" from the top, and I'm similar height and proportions to Fonda. Assuming Fonda is 6'-1", plus 1" for shoes, that puts Lucy somewhere between 5'-7 and 5'-7 1/2", about right for her at that age. Those scenes include their first date, her first visit to meet his family and the wedding. Even in the scenes where she is wearing 3/8" (+/-) house slippers, she comes up to about his nose, which on my head is about 6" from the top. Those scenes include their first night in their new (old) house and Christmas morning). In the long shot scenes, where her shoes are between 1 1/2" to 2" heels, she consistently comes up to his eye level - within 5" of the top of Fonda's 6'-1" + 1" shoes head. (I think you're subtracting too much for her hair).
Frank, please don't take it personally that I am skeptical of your 30 or 40 year old estimates of Lucy's or Desi's or anyone else's exact height. I am seeing the same things as you, and reaching a different conclusion. But, I don't know how you can walk away from that movie, knowing the heights of Fonda and Van Johnson, and observing her clearly tall stature, thinking Lucille Ball is at all under 5'-7". Frank2 says on 17/Mar/06
I had an aunt who looked like Harpo Marx. But unlike Harpo, my aunt never stopped talking! larry says on 17/Mar/06
I have an Aunt that looked a lot like Lucille Ball! In fact I thought she WAS Lucy when I was about 5! :-) Don't know about the actual height of either her OR Desi, but I did do army induction physicals in San Antonio, Texas during the Vietnam "ho-down" (as I've boringly mentioned before). The height that went down on the IPEF (inductee physical examination form) was the height you were measured at (in this case, for several months - by yours truly). We kept meticulous records, because that's what the US army does: EVERYTHING gets recorded. A couple of (relatively) big time athletes passed through our cheerful halls at Fort Sam Houston while I was there and one 5'10" baseball player THOUGHT he was 6 foot (even, as he put it). But my sergeant always said; "ACCURATE PRIVATE! YOU WRITE DOWN WHAT THE DAMN STADIOMETER SAYS, YOU DUMB JACKASS!" So, 5'10" went on the form. I'm not sure how a guy in his privys would bribe you, but I knew about the penalty for upsetting Sergeant Williamson! :-) Could a military examination be fudged? Theoretically, but quite a few "grunts" would know and "We Grunts" loved to talk! Elvis Pressley was evidently measured at 6'0.5" (not the 6'2" he was stated to have been) and 6'0.5" was what went in his record (at least according to several folks on this site).
These PARTICULAR cases I don't know about, but I never heard of the US army taking anyone's word for anything. Are mistakes possible? Of course, but always up and by as much as 2-3"? Maybe, but not on my watch. I can see being off by a cm, but after a couple of months of measuring guys, I could accurately judge standing height to within +/- 1 cm.
Now, having watched the I LOVE LUCY show many times, Lucy always looked about 5'7-7.5" to me and Desi seemed to be about 5'9-9.5". But then I don't recall them showing footware. Wasn't William Frawley shorter than Lucy? Comparing them with famous co-stars, that seems about right. Gee: Lucy was 6'!? :-) Then my fibbing daughter is ACTUALLY 6'4.5 - 6'5"! Funny, when I've been in LA the folks there didn't LOOK shorter than the ones in Austin, Texas. In fact, on average, they seemed a bit taller. Is everyone in LA wearing elevator shoes!? How sneaky is that? (just pulling your legs, folks). Frank says on 17/Mar/06
I'm watching Lucy with 6'1" Henry Fonda in Yours Mine and Ours and Lucy standing next to Fonda in long shots while wearing nurses shoes with approx. two inch heels looks to be about seven inches shorter. She barely comes up to Fonda's nose if you subtract all her hair. When she's wearing heels and they place her in close up's she's about five inches shorter. She comes up to his eye level. Next to 6'2" Van Johnson she really looks short. Frank2 says on 16/Mar/06
So when I say I saw her and Desi in the flesh on several occasions it means nothing? Hmmmmmmm......Maybe I should just give up. Hell! I lied all along. Lucy was an Amazon! About six feet tall barefoot! Desi was 6'3" and Bill Frawley was 5'10". Oh, and Billy Barty...he wasn't a little person. Barty was actually 5'8". Here's a photo to prove it: Click Here And remember little Topo Gigo who appeared with Senőr Wencez on the Ed Sullivan Show? Well, Topo was actually a giant of a mouse! Didn't you notice he was taller than Ed Sullivan? richinkle says on 16/Mar/06
Frank, the pictures you've submitted don't show any shoes, feet or context. I have many of the episodes and film footage from which your stills were taken. Lucy is much taller than she looks in the publicity stills. I have tried to take pictures of them on my television, showing the position of the feet and footware. Unfortunately, Rob was nice enough to post them, but the quality is grainy, and most of my collection is not on dvd (where the quality of the stills is somewhat better). But, Frank, you've been in the business long enough to know that publicity stills are even more doctored than height records.
And your zealousness and repetition don't make your observations any more convincing or compelling, nor do your carefully selected publicity stills that don't show any feet or shoes. The proof is in the film, showing full context body shots, not the still photos. Frank2 says on 14/Mar/06
Oh what's the use. You people believe what you want. Desi was six feet and Lucy was almost five ten. No Hollywood male star was under five ten. There! Happy? richinkle says on 14/Mar/06
Frank, while I don't believe a word the President says, I do believe certain government records - particularly the height on a military discharge certificate. If Desi was going to pay to change the record on his height, why choose 5'-10", when his Certificate of Naturalization, which is dated two years earlier, shows 5'-11"? Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between. Or, the Army actually does a physical when you're inducted and keeps records of it for when you're discharged. Whereas, a naturalization form or a passport uses an estimated height, or takes the applicant's word for it.
Lucy, I believe, downplayed her height. She may have worn heels when she got dressed up, but she usually wore flats on her shows. She also seldom stood up straight or flaunted her height. She often slouched and hunched and leaned and made herself seem smaller and more child-like. It was part of her character and her comedy. Paul says on 13/Mar/06
Frank2, I've enjoyed reading your various posts and think there is merit to some of what you say, but to be honest, I question some of your statements. When you say (rather emphatically) to believe you but not government records or other reliable sources, that's a bit hard to swallow. Some of these heights you cite are based on other people's recollections from 40, 50, even 60 years ago. Not the best evidence IMHO.
Please don't take this as a personal attack. It's not. I just think there's room for the possibility that maybe all these sources that say Desi was 5'10" (or Dino was close to 6 foot) might actually have some validity. In the end, does it really matter if Dino was 5'11" or 6'0" or even 5'10" as you claim? Bottom line is that he was a great entertainer who will be remembered for his talents more than his height. Frank2 says on 13/Mar/06
Desi was not 5'11 1/2" nor 5'11" nor 5'10". He was shorter. I'd put him at around 5'9" max and that was when he was young. He wore lifts on I Love Lucy. And Lucy did wear flats, but each time she was dressed up she wore heels. And stop believing the damned government records! They have Robert Taylor at 6'. He was 5'10". They have Ty Power at 6'. He was 5'10". The police claimed Michael Jackson was 5'11"! It's all nonsense. Money goes into one's hand and then the records are changed. Look, unlike most of you I've actully seen many of these people, talked with them, even gotten to know them on a first-name bases. Lucy was about 5'6", Desi was 5'9". Billy Barty was 3' tall! Or perhaps he was 6'5" and tried to hide it! richinkle says on 13/Mar/06
I've seen bio data that has put her height anywhere from 5'-6" to 5'-9" ("Ball of Fire" the latest book out about her, puts her at the taller height.) Her autobiography puts her right in the middle at 5'-7 1/2", a height her daughter confirms.
I have watched every I Love Lucy episode dozens of times - and she only occasionally wore high heels on the show. Usually she wore no-heel house slippers. (She had a foot condition that made heels painful, and wore them only when she had to.) In early episodes when she wore high heels she stood the same height as Desi Arnaz. Barefoot, there appeared to be no more than 2" difference between them. After the first season or so, he began to wear lifts to maintain a greater difference in height.
According to his US Army discharge papers, Desi stood 5'-10". I imagine his induction probably included a physical, and that this was his measured height. His Certificate of Naturalization puts him at 5'-11", and his passport and daughter state his height at 5'-11 1/2". (Copies of these documents are part of a Lucy-Desi scrapbook you can buy at any book-store). If Desi if 5'-10", Lucy is clearly taller than 5'-7". She's also clearly taller than Katherine Hepburn and Carole Burnett, both of whom claimed to be 5'-7".
[Editor Rob: Arnaz was listed 5ft 10 in the army?
I think Frank2 mentioned he was this height aswell...] Frank2 says on 9/Mar/06
Oh, I first time I saw and met with her was back in the mid-1960's when she attended a party thrown by the Motion Picture Mother's Club of which her mom and my grandmother were members. In a bio I read on Lucy it clearly stated she was 5'6". She almost always wore high heels on camera, mostly three-inch so being 5'9" was quite tall for her day, tall-enough to force Desi to wear lifts. And if anyone can't spot his obvious elevators on I Love Lucy, they do need glasses! The last time I saw Lucy was when she visited her husband Gary Morton at Fox Studios. That was about a year before she died. By then she had lost about an inch. In person she had a deeper voice than most men do! I think only Suzanne Pleshette has a deeper one.
[Editor Rob: Lucie Arnaz has said Desi was 5ft 11.5...] richinkle says on 8/Mar/06
How late in her life did you see her as exactly 5'-6"? I suspect she shrunk to that height by the time of her death. Frank2 says on 6/Mar/06
"Big Red" as Desi used to call her was exactly 5'6". I saw her many times. Desi was 5'9" and always wore hug lifts on I Love Lucy. Rick Hinkle says on 16/Aug/05
I just saw a website that Lucie Arnaz has called "Ask Lucie", where she confirms her mother's 5'-7 1/2" height. http://www.luciearnaz.com/Set4.html |
