How tall is Clint Eastwood - Page 2

Add a Comment5611 comments

Average Guess (448 Votes)
Peak: 6ft 3.37in (191.4cm)
Current: 5ft 11.84in (182.5cm)
viper said on 19/Apr/22
Everyone can agree he's taller than Ali

He was at least 6-3. Question is how much over it. He might have been 6-3.5
Hong said on 17/Apr/22
@avi,his height is usually listed as 6ft4 because he said he was that height,if he had of said ,when asked his height,he was 6ft3,then he would have been listed as 6ft3.I don't think many people would have questioned his height at 6ft3,he always looked only an inch or so taller than 6ft2 guys.
Hyper said on 17/Apr/22
Clint Eastwood is taller than Muhammad Ali.

Ali said so himself.

Over 6’3” for sure.
avi said on 16/Apr/22
I am not sure why he is listed so high peak. 6'2.5 makes more sense. Weak 6'3
Hong said on 6/Apr/22
Yeah Tall Sam,it depends on Clints posture his height can look anything from 6ft2 to 6ft3 plus.Clint usually stands with very relaxed posture and hardly ever stands to his full height so it's difficult to guess his actual height,but 6ft4 is not very likely a fraction over 6ft3 is possible.
Tall Sam said on 5/Apr/22
Yeah Eastwood looks a bit skinnier than he would later look in the Every Which Way movies but he’s naturally not as big in build as Wayne. I still think over 6’3” at some times is quite defendable for Eastwood.
Hong said on 4/Apr/22
Click Here @ Tall Sam Clint looks pretty scrawny next to Wayne in that pic, I think Wayne probably is wearing cowboy boots with the rest of his outfit, also as you pointed out he is closer to the camera,taken all that into account 6ft3 is near enough to how Clint is looking in that pic,I've posted another pic of Clint Wayne and Charlton Heston all together and Wayne looks the largest of the 3 guys.
Hong said on 4/Apr/22
Click Here Incase anybody is doubting Holbrook was just a 6ft even guy and was more 6ft1 range here he is with 6ft ish Alac Baldwin.Clint at most looked 3 inches taller,as for soul his height is debatable.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Apr/22
Looks more 2 inches range in that photo deducting hair but I think Clint is slouching a bit. See here with 6'0.5 David Soul, do you really only see 6'2-6'3? Click Here In the film Clint looked easily 3 inches taller.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Apr/22
I see 3 inches between Clint and Hal, about what it looked in the film. Clint is slouching a little in that photo.
Rory said on 3/Apr/22
No that's never a 4 inch difference. That's about 2.5 maybe 2.75 I'd say, which is the sort of height difference there was between them throughout out the film too. I felt Clint looked 6ft3ish in Magnum force with Holbrook possibly a strong 6ft range in that particular film.
Hong said on 3/Apr/22
Click Here in this one Clint 8s looking know more than 3 inches taller
Tall Sam said on 3/Apr/22
Not sure if this has already been posted but here’s Eastwood with John Wayne (and Don Siegel). Considering that Clint is standing loose and Wayne has a camera advantage, Eastwood looks 6’3” range. Click Here
James B 171.5cm said on 3/Apr/22
He seems 4 inches taller in that photo with holbrook and looks like he could actually be 5 inches taller if he stood with better posture.

Must be uneven ground or something?
Hong said on 1/Apr/22
Click Here Here's Clint during the making of dirty Harry with 6ft Hal Holbrook,he didn't really look 3.5 inches taller than Holbrook,sometimes he only look 2 inches taller and maybe 3 depending on posture.
James B 171.5cm said on 29/Mar/22
I always thought the original 6ft4 for clint seemed off when seeing him in westerns and dirty Harry films.
Tilon kluh said on 29/Mar/22
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
That's the range I've alwaysa guess for him. 190 barefoot max so under 6ft3. 6ft2.75 was his peak height
Rory said on 28/Mar/22
His posture was never that good, which is why I think at times he could barely look 6ft3,but for a measurement could rise up to 6ft3.25 or 3.5 I think. The scene with Ebsen is a case in point, for me Buddy definitely had the better posture. Clint peak may well be similar to a guy like Paul Bettany actually, doesn't stand tall generally but clears 6ft3 when he does.
James B 171.5cm said on 28/Mar/22
Guys just wondering do you think clint looked 6'3 1/2 in Dirty Harry?

With his hairstyle and slim build I am suprised he didn't look taller but then his posture wasn't that great was it?
Editor Rob
I think at most that mark
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Mar/22
His peak is on point. Somewhere between 6ft3-4 is realistic.
Hong said on 24/Mar/22
Maybe 6ft3.25 peak Rob?
Hong said on 24/Mar/22
Rob do you think Clint looks only 2 inches shorter than Fess Parker in the video I posted,even with heel advantage?
Editor Rob
He was looking about 6ft 3. With Buddy, I think he is taller, but it's not that much...
James B 171.5cm said on 23/Mar/22
Rob do you agree with the average vote for his peak which is 6’3 3/8ths?
Editor Rob
I agree at a peak he cleared 6ft 3, it's just a matter of exactly how much.
Hong said on 23/Mar/22
Barefoot peak evening around 190.5cm that's the max for me 6ft3.
Hong said on 23/Mar/22
@Arch Stanton 6ft4 barefoot in the morning would mean 6ft3.25 in the evening.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Mar/22
Nah, just looking at him proportionally in film in 60s-70s period, the legs and look, he looked taller than 190cm. I've seen his films too many times, 6 ft 4 measured in the morning barefoot is believable peak.
Hong said on 21/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Clint and 6ft3 listed Buddy Ebsen from Rawhide,from 34 minutes there is ample opportunity to compare both guys heights,and once again they are looking pretty even although Clint may have heel advantage,I can't see Clint as anything over 6ft3 flat and taking away his slight heel advantage and being 22 years younger than Ebsen, 6ft3.5 meaning he is taller than Ebsen seems very unlikely.
Hong said on 21/Mar/22
Click Here As you can see Clint's heel is the highest of the group.
Cold Water said on 19/Mar/22
182.4 cm - Now
191.3 cm - Peak
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
I'd say he could have stretched to 193cm in his shoes,but barefoot at peak was more 190cm flat.
Hong said on 18/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Fess with Reagan in 1985 you can see how much Fess towers over Reagan,compared with pics with Clint and Reagan taken at a similar period.
Pierre said on 17/Mar/22
Hong said on 25/Feb/22
Click Here I've posted this video before,but it still is in my opinion a clear example of Clint Eastwood being 6ft3 max in height aged 35.Clint is clearly is looking at least 2.5 inches shorter than 6ft5.5 Fess Parker and that's with footwear advantage,there is no denying that Clint was sub 6ft3.5 in this video,unless Parker was 6ft6.5 tall.

By this comparison Clint is never 6"3.5'.Fess Parker stands 99% of the time in a terrible posture to talk to his neighbours in this video .Plus at 5 min 06 we can see Clint's heel ,that looks advantageous (at 5 min 34 we can see Fess's heel).
Imalpol2 said on 17/Mar/22
000614080093 said on 9/Mar/22
Sure... He was 198 cm peak and now 191 cm ok...
Imalpol2 said on 17/Mar/22
192 cm for a peak Eastood is far from reality. 193 cm in his boots makes a solid 189 peak Eastwood. 190 max!
Hong said on 17/Mar/22
Click Here
Sinclair said on 14/Mar/22
Admittedly, Clint only seemed 6’2” range, maybe 6’2.5” max, by the time of In The Line of Fire.
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here This should be the one I ment to post.
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here Here's another screen shot in this one Clint is looking closer to 2 inches shorter than Parker
Hong said on 14/Mar/22
Click Here Here's a screenshot of all three standing together,remember Clint is wearing cowboy boots which would have roughly a 1.25 to 1.5 inch heel so at 6ft3.5 barefoot he should be standing at near 6ft5 in his boots,Parker on the other hand is wearing flatter footwear of maybe 1inch heel at 6ft5.5 barefoot he would be 6ft6.5 in his shoes,that would leave a max of two inches between Clint and Parker,it looks a bit more in my opinion.Rob I would be interested to know you opinion on this video,do you think Parker looks only 2 inches taller than Clint?
Rory said on 10/Mar/22
How flat were Fess Parkers shoes though in that clip? Pretty unorthodox, but from what I could see I'd be surprised if say less than 1. 25 inches. 6ft2.75 is definitely undercooking peak Clint, but 6ft3.25 instead of 3.5 is possible.
Hong said on 9/Mar/22
The video with Fess Parker and Danny Kaye is not what a 6ft4 inch guy in cowboy boots and a hat would look measure up to a 6ft5.5 guy in flatter footwear,Clint is struggling to look 6ft4 even in his boots in that video,unless of course Parker was 6ft7 or something?Clint looks similar to Buddy Ebsen who was max 6ft3 peak and more by his late fifties 6ft2.5.I would completely rule out 193cm or 6ft4 inches whatever you prefer.The guy was 6ft2.75 or maybe 6ft3 peak,the 6ft4 listing was just a bit of Hollywood exaggeration.
000614080093 said on 9/Mar/22
Eastwood's peak was 193 cm, current 184 cm
Hong said on 2/Mar/22
Click Here Here's Clint with Snyder,also in that pic of Snyder with Howard Stern,Stern is wearing cowboy boots,there is an interview on YouTube the photo was taken at the time of that interview an Stern has cowboy boots on.
Hong said on 28/Feb/22
Click Here Snyder and 6ft5.25 listed Howard Stern.
Hong said on 28/Feb/22
Click Here Here's a video of David Letterman talking to Tom Snyder,he was one of the previous presenters of the late show,at 1 hour 8min Letterman commented on Snyders size and asks him how tall he is Snyder replied 6ft4 in his high heels.There ate some pics of Snyder and Clint from 1980 in which Clint looks pretty similar to Snyder,the angles aren't great though,but there is also a pic of Snyder standing next to 6ft5.25 listed Howard Stern and Stern looks a good 2 inches taller.I will post the Stern and Clint comparison's later.It seems to me that Snyders comment about being 6ft4 in his high heels may also apply to Clint but barefoot both guys would be more 6ft3 flat,also Letterman IMO was more a 6ft1 guy.
Hong said on 25/Feb/22
Click Here I've posted this video before,but it still is in my opinion a clear example of Clint Eastwood being 6ft3 max in height aged 35.Clint is clearly is looking at least 2.5 inches shorter than 6ft5.5 Fess Parker and that's with footwear advantage,there is no denying that Clint was sub 6ft3.5 in this video,unless Parker was 6ft6.5 tall.
Hong said on 18/Feb/22
I think from all the pics and videos sent Clint was 191cm or 6ft3.25 at peak a slight downgrade would be satisfactory,his current height could range from 5ft11 with typical posture and standing for measurement 6ft flat IMO.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Feb/22
Great clip Hong, I've not seen that before. If Heston was only 6'2 flat Orson Welles was under 6 ft.
Hong said on 15/Feb/22
Click Here Here's a clip of Clint near 6ft5 listed Will Sampson,it's not the greatest clip for an accurate height comparison,Clint is most likely in boots and Sampson barefoot,the terrain is uneven too,but givin all that Clint is looking 6ft4 range in his boots in comparison to Sampson IMO.
Hong said on 14/Feb/22
Click Here Here's Clint with 6ft3 Jim Nantz,it's hard to believe the young Clint was this tall.
Jtm said on 11/Feb/22
6’2 peak Heston and 6’3.5 Eastwood seems about right to me. I would believe Eastwood was 6’4 peak before I would believe 6’3 peak for Heston.
Hong said on 11/Feb/22
Click Here Rob Here's that pic with Hoge from a different angle,as you can see as James B 171.5cm said,Clints posture is horrific,to be fair to Clint if he even straightened his Knees he could gain a good inch.
Editor Rob
How much Clint gains when being measured, versus how he stands is the big question really.
James B 171.5cm said on 10/Feb/22
Rob his posture is horrific though in that photo
Editor Rob
The question with Clint is how much he might stand better when measured. You can't really unkink bad kyphosis in the spine.
ArchibaldVonHabsburg said on 9/Feb/22
Here is the latest photo of Clint Eastwood with golfer Tom Hoge. Hoge is allegedly 6ft1 (185cm). Eastwood certainly looks a bit shorter. Rob, what do you think? Click Here
Editor Rob
maybe 5ft 11 there
Joseph Cully said on 7/Feb/22
I think that Jimmy Stewart always stooped alot. He rarely looked as tall as he really was.
Tall Sam said on 3/Feb/22
Few older men claim their current height if they were ever honest, even though they undoubtedly notice they’re losing height.
Hong said on 2/Feb/22
Yeah he was looking in early 2000s in the 6ft1.5 range by 2020 he was looking Bearley 6ft flat,now under 6ft around 5ft11 range.
James B 172cm said on 2/Feb/22
No offense to clint or anything but he's totally deluded still claiming 6ft4 in the 2000s
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 2/Feb/22
Heston you could argue was 190cm which would possibly push Clint into 192-193cm territory. I don’t either were quite the full 6ft3 and full 6ft4 though

Wayne is claiming 6ft4½ in shoes. No way barefoot. Comfortably shorter than 6ft5 men. Apparently loathed working with guys who were taller than him
Arch Stanton said on 1/Feb/22
And some people have Heston down as 190cm peak...
Arch Stanton said on 1/Feb/22
Well, Eastwood was easily an inch taller than Charlton Heston at the 1972 Oscars I think it was... Wayne claimed 6'4.5 In The Quiet Man remember. I don't think Eastwood ever claimed that.
Hong said on 31/Jan/22
Click Here @Joseph Cully I've posted the entire video of that TV show you mentioned and I can't see any examples of Stewart looking slightly taller than Clint in it,Stewart may have been slightly taller than Clint at peak but this video does not show it,there are some pics of both guys together and in one Stewart looks taller but in a couple of more Clint looks taller.
Joseph Cully said on 31/Jan/22
I remember a television show honoring Joan Collins. It was in the mid to late 80s. Clint Eastwood and Jimmy Stewart were sitting next to each other. Jimmy Stewart was nearly 80 by that time. Clint Eastwood was mid to late 50s. Jimmmy Stewart was slightly taller than Clint Eastwood.
avrheight said on 11/Jan/22
Rob, who would you give the edge to, Easttwood or John Wayne?
Editor Rob
I still give peak John Wayne a slight edge.
Hong said on 9/Jan/22
Click Here Here's Clint with his rawhide co-star Eric Fleming,I posted a pic on December 7th of Fleming in front of a height chart taken while he was in the navy.Fleming is just scraping 6ft3 from the very top of his hair.In the pic I've just sent both guys are wearing the same type of cowboy boots the heels look similar,and Clint is not looking taller than Fleming,maybe if Clint straightened up a bit they would be even.If Clint was taller than Sydney Poitier at peak it would only be slightly not much in my opinion.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Jan/22
Clint definitely looked taller than Poitier ever did in his prime..
Hong said on 7/Jan/22
Too me Clint looked similar to the likes of Sydney Poitier RIP great actor very sanded by his death he had a long life and a very big influence on cinema for people of African origin,a true trail blazer and icon,may he rest in peace.Clint also was similar to the likes of Morgan Freeman,Buddy Ebsen, Sean Connery,Charlton Heston,James Stewart,and in the Modern age Ryan Reynolds, Dwayne Johnson,Chris Hemsworth,Ben Affleck.What I'm saying is my opinion is Clint was around the 6ft3 mark at peak,somewhere between 6ft2.5 and 6ft3,from all the pics I've looked at and all his movies compareing him to other actors and celebrities over the past 35 years this is the conclusion I've reached.
Hong said on 5/Jan/22
Click Here Clint and Sydney Poitier in 2011,Sydney looks the taller guy,although Sydney is 3 years older than Clint it's Clint who's doing all the shrinking.
Hong said on 1/Jan/22
Good point about the the small tilt in Wayne's favour Rob,but Wayne is looking his listed height of 6ft3.75 I have no problem with that.8 would be interested to here your opinion on Clint's height when you compare him to John Agar who is looking like a 6ft1 guy compared to 6ft2 Ben Johnson.Do you think Clint 8s looking over 6ft3 in the youtube clip I posted?
Hong said on 1/Jan/22
Click Here Here's a better group pic of Wayne,Johnson and Agar.Wayne is looking a big 6ft4 guy there,Johnson at 6ft2 is making Agar 6ft1 so ir seems an accurate height for him,if you watch the YouTube clip I posted earlier of Clint with Agar allowing for Clint's hunched posture I can't see anything more than a 6ft3 flat guy compared to a 6ft1 Agar.With his bad posture Clint is looking only slightly taller than Ager so standing to his full height he would gain a bit more height maybe 1 inch or so.I cant see Clint anymore than 6ft3 there.
Editor Rob
There might be a small tilt in John's favour, if you look at the platform they are on, but still manages to look near 6ft 4 there.

Looks similar boots to others, so no lifts there.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Jan/22
Ah 1955 Hollywood. If I could go back in a time machine and see it! I tend to associate Clint with the 70s, I don't think of him in the young 50s way. Clint started to look shorter by the early 80s I thought, Sudden Impact around 1983. By Deadpool he didn't look over 6'3 with Neeson.
Hong said on 31/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a pic of Clint and Agar,Agar is the one on the left in black,using the bar over their head's is a good reference point for compering their heights,I'd say Clint is looking around a couple of inches taller there.
Hong said on 31/Dec/21
Click Here Here's John Agar with 6ft2 Ben Johnson and 6ft3.75 John Wayne,he looks no more than 6ft1 in comparison,in fact there looks to be a similar height difference between Johnson and Agar as there was between Clint and Agar.
Arch Stanton said on 30/Dec/21
Not easy to judge from that clip, he's slouching a fair bit there which makes him look nearer 6'2 but yeah if Agar was 6'1 he certainly doesn't give the impression of a big 6'4 guy there. I think Hudson was pretty close to 6'5, 195cm maybe, no lower than 6'4.5 anyway. Remember he had about 1.5 inches on Wayne at a time when he claimed to have lost an inch!
Hong said on 29/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a very young Clint in an early bit part role,the actor in the scene with him is John Agar he is listed as 6ft1,now I don't know how accurate his height listing is because he's not very well known too me,but if he was 6ft1,Clint is looking somewhat in the 6ft2.5 maybe 6ft3 range? in comparison,definitely not 6ft4 or 6ft3.5 if that guy was 6ft1?
JamesB171.5cm said on 27/Dec/21
Clint was under his peak height in deadpool for sure.
Hong said on 27/Dec/21
Click Here Here's 58 year old Clint with 36 year old Liam Neeson 6ft4.Clint is closer to the camera,from watching the movie Neeson had about an inch on Clint,in my opinion Clint was still near peak at that age,so 6ft3 is a good height estimate for his peak.
James B 171.5 said on 23/Dec/21
was rock Hudson a full 6'5 though?
Hong said on 23/Dec/21
Click Here Here's Clint and Rock Hudson,as you can see Rock is taller,Hudson's height is a matter of opinion,he looked a solid 6ft4 guy too me,could have been 6ft4.5 but definitely not 6ft5.Clint is looking 6ft2.5 there if Rock was 6ft4,Rock at 6ft4.5 puts Clint at 6ft3.But that's just my opinion,I could be wrong.
184guy2 said on 22/Dec/21
Under 6'3 using Rock Hudson is totally nonsense
No 6'2.5 guy would look that tall beside a 6'5 ish man
Masae180cm said on 22/Dec/21
I was watching a segment of The David Frost Show in 1969 featuring Eastwood and Muhammad Ali. Ali mentions that he is 6'2 and is surprised at how much taller Eastwood and the other actor were.
Hong said on 19/Dec/21
@brunobrown,Wayne was probably in his mid to late 60s at the time of that pic,he looks a big guy considering Clint and Heston were both 6ft2 plus guys,Clint looks slightly taller than Heston who was around 6ft2.5 range,I'd give Clint 6ft3 and Wayne 6ft3.75 at the time of that photo.
brunobrown said on 18/Dec/21
That's a brilliant photo Hong, but its clear Wayne if he stood straight would be clearly taller even at his advanced age compared to the other 2. Proves what I said Wayne lost very little height as he aged.
Hong said on 17/Dec/21
Click Here Here's a rare pic of Clint with Charlton Heston and John Wayne,all 3 guys look similar Clint looks slightly taller tan Heston but it's hard to tell who's taller with Wayne.
Hong said on 13/Dec/21
All true Rory,but it dose give us an evidence that Fleming was a tall guy in and around the 6ft3 Mark.Clint and Fleming did look pretty similar,also Fleming could have been in footwear and the height chart was most likely accurate,if so that would make him more 6ft2 range if that was the case that's why taking all this into account I'll go with 6ft3 range for both Flemiig and Clint peak.
Rory said on 10/Dec/21
Yh but you've no idea what Flemings posture is like in that photo, is it a measured pose, is he standing loosely,are the measurements even drawn up accurately, is he barefoot or in footwear? There's too many variables at play to take it too seriously.
Hong said on 9/Dec/21
I've always been curious about Fleming's height he's listed on line as 6ft3.5 and 6ft3,this pic makes him about 6ft3 max or maybe depending on the time the photo was taken he could be more 6ft2.5 range?Him and Clint looked pretty similar in height,sometimes he edged Clint and sometimes Clint edged him,judging by this pic and presuming Fleming gained no more height after 18 it's looking like 6ft3 max for Clint and possibly 6ft2.5.
Tall In The Saddle said on 1/Dec/21

Yeah some photos can be tricky with uneven surfaces. Poor Clint, he should’ve been the one standing on higher ground for that photo. LOL.
Hong said on 30/Nov/21
@Rising174cm I agree with all your points,I believe Clint was a solid 6ft3 guy peak.
Rising174cm said on 28/Nov/21
He was a bit taller than 6'2.5" Muhammad Ali on an early 70s talk show with a bit thicker footwear so about 6'3" peak seems right or maybe around 191 cm. I still think he was around a full 6'3" in the Dead Pool with Liam Neeson and probably not under 190 cm or a weak 6'3" range by In The Line of Fire. In 1992, he still looked at least as tall as Danny Glover, if not a hair taller and Glover was about 190 cm peak, imo, with at least a chance of a full 6'3".

Clint probably lost his first fraction in his 50s or early 60s and he started to shrink more noticeably around the mid to late 90s. I still think he would have measured at least a full 6'0" or a fraction over in his early 80s and I saw him look as much as 3 cm taller than a roughly 5'11" DiCaprio when he stood well promoting J. Edgar.

But I think he likely dropped below 6' and into the 182 cm range by his mid to late 80s. Probably about 5'11.5", but it depends on how much taller he can stand for a measurement.
Hong said on 22/Nov/21
@Tall In The Saddle,that would explain Clint looking under 6ft in comparison,he was at that stage still a solid 6ft I think Rob had him at 6f.05 at that stage.
Pedriscovery said on 20/Nov/21
Click Here
Hong said on 18/Nov/21
Click Here @Desky this is the pic with Zucchero,in an interview at the time Zucchero said he was recently working with Clint on J Edgar and said the movie will be out in 2012 that's almost 10 years ago and Clint was looking sub 6ft next to him.
Desky said on 16/Nov/21
Looked tiny in a recent picture with actor Craig Zucchero (listed by the unreliable IMBD at 191cm)
Myers Haddonfield said on 4/Nov/21
Imo his 4” shorter at 90. Legit tall guy in his youth. 6-3 minimum. Probably 6-3.5 legit.
James B 171.5 said on 2/Nov/21
rob do you think 216 lbs is possible in deadpool?
Hong said on 26/Oct/21
Click Here Here's Clint with DiCaprio in 2020 Clint aged 90,they both look pretty similar in height,Clint's posture is bad, but 8f he could straighten up he my edge DeCaprio out, but at 90 he's still looking 5ft11 to 6ft range.
Meltdown said on 24/Oct/21
I saw a photo recently of Clint with Leo DiCaprio who was edging him out. I think Clint is well below 6ft now. Time for an update.
James B 171.5cm said on 24/Oct/21
In the early 90s Glover could have been like 6’2.5-6’3
Arch Stanton said on 24/Oct/21
Yes, Clint could even look 6 ft 3 in some scenes in Blood Work in 2002, I noticed that.
berta said on 21/Oct/21
interesting pgoto with danny glover. I think glover was 6´3 peak and clint look pretty mutch the exact same height. But we all know clint had lost height by then. Lets say clint was 190 cm in that photo and peak 191,5.
Hong said on 12/Oct/21
Click Here Clint and Danny Glover both 6ft3 range guys.
Hong said on 11/Oct/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,Here's both guys at the premier,although Clint is bending his right knee and is dropping a bit of height,Daniels is also not standing his full height,giving that, Clint does look to be near a full inch shorter,by age 70 Clint was looking somewhere between 6ft1 and 6ft2 range IMO.
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Oct/21
Just watched Blood Work 2002.

Strange, at times Clint appeared on par with Jeff Daniels, even maybe holding a very slight edge but some scenes it seemed Daniels held the same slight edge. Very symptomatic for two guys who are basically the same height but Daniels was supposed to be 6’2 3/4” peak so technically was arguably the taller of the two as compared to 90s Clint who could’ve easily fallen below 6’2 1/2” by the 2000s.

However, red carpet photos for the movie, though not the best angles, seem to indicate that Daniels was definitely taller. Suffice to say, we all seem to agree that Clint was already down to 6’2 1/2” by the early to mid 90s.
Hong said on 4/Oct/21
Click Here Here's Gary Grubbs with James Cromwell,just to show he's a tall guy,6ft4 is believable.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 2/Oct/21
By the mid-90’s was starting to look under 6ft3
Hong said on 1/Oct/21
@Futy Adore that would be a minimum for me,but still possible,he did look that at times in his younger year
Futy Adore said on 30/Sep/21
6'2,5" - 1,89m
Never a 6 fert guy.
Clint is tall
James B 171.5cm said on 29/Sep/21
Rob watching unforgiven right now

How tall do you think he was by the time of that film? 6’2.75 maybe?
Editor Rob
arguably 6ft 2.5
Hong said on 22/Sep/21
Yeah I think we can rule out Kelly's Heroes for compering Clint's and Sutherland's height because there was no way of compering them in that movie,but in Space cowboys Sutherland did look taller than Clint.Clint at 70 and Sutherland 65 years old at the time,Clint was probably about an inch off peak at that stage,Sutherland was still looking in the 6ft3 range.Who was taller in their Youth? It could go either way
Hong said on 21/Sep/21
That's an 81 year old Cushing and Lee was 72 years old.
Rory said on 20/Sep/21
I wouldn't bet on Sutherland being taller than Clint when they were young. I felt in Kellys heroes particularly at the end of the film, Clint looked the taller if anything but then there wasnt really any strong comparisons to make.
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Sep/21
On Lee’s THIS IS YOUR LIFE with excellent vision to compare, he didn’t appear to have much on an older Vincent Price. Possibly 6’4 3/4” but I like 6’4 1/2” more for Lee which would give him from 1” (given Clint at 6’3 1/2”) to 1 1/2” (given Clint at 6’3”) advantage over Eastwood. I think peak times peak Sutherland had the edge on Clint and a young Sutherland appeared alongside Lee in a few films and it appeared that Lee was clearly the taller man.
Tall Sam said on 18/Sep/21
@James B 171.5, for sure although some including myself feel that Lee was rounding down by claiming 6'4" a lot, he could've been a solid 6'4.75" in reality.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Sep/21
6'4 morning measurement is believable in his 20s. I don't know, at times I looked at Christopher Lee and couldn't see 6'4.75-6'5.
Hong said on 17/Sep/21
Lee was obviously taller than Clint,I'd say he would have had about 1.5 inches on Clint,Lee looked in the 6ft4.5 range where Clint looked in the 6ft3 range.
James B 171.5 said on 16/Sep/21
I bet christopher lee would have had easily 1 inch on clint at there peaks
Rory said on 15/Sep/21
No I think late 1970s is when he lost his first bit of height, probably around the time of every which way but loose,and then half inch gone by the end of the 80s.
Tall In The Saddle said on 13/Sep/21

MichaelMyers said on 12/Sep/21
I believe he was definitely 6'4" peak. He seems to have started losing height earlier than most people do, in the early 1970s when Clint was in his early 40s, he was already looking noticeably shorter than how tall he looked in films he starred in from the 1960s. No idea as to current height, maybe 6'0" if he stood with perfect posture?
ChaosControl said on 12/Sep/21
@T. I. T. S. I know you would have made a similar joke given the opportunity
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Sep/21

No comprendo on your last post. Help me out. : )
Tall In The Saddle said on 8/Sep/21

No comprendo on your last post 5 Sep 2021. Help me out. : )



Think revenge for Randy Newman’s 1977 hit tune but replace title lyrics with Tall People and substitute in all relevant lyrics otherwise. Eg. “They’ve got tree trunk legs, And they stand so tall, You’ve to climb a ladder, To ask how are y’all?”. Bernie Taupin is eating his heart out right now. I must remember where I put Elton’s number again. He might be up for this.
Hong said on 8/Sep/21
Click Here @ Henrik,I don't think Neeson had 2 inches on Clint in The Dead Pool,Here's a couple of stills from the movie,I think Clint holds up very well against a solid 6ft4 guy like Neeson,and was probably still in the 6ft3 range by his late fifties.
ChaosControl said on 5/Sep/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Sep/21

"That's what she said". Haha.

I know what you’re like, you’d have done much the same
Henrik said on 4/Sep/21
I thought Clint looked no more than 6'2" compared to 6'4" Liam Neeson in The Dead Pool. In the first scene with the two, Neeson is looking down when Clint interrogates him.
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Sep/21

"That's what she said". Haha.

Brings to mind an oldie but a goodie. An exchange between a couple whilst in bed:-

Husband: An inch MORE and I would be KING!

Wife: An inch LESS and you'd be QUEEN!

Talk about getting royally scr*wed.
Ian C. said on 3/Sep/21
You see Chaos, there is a binding ordinance setting down the limits of permissible height, and you are in violation of it. Don't leave the house during business hours or you will be ticketed. Tall people think you're just so superior, and then you step on a normal sized adult and suddenly it is no longer a joke.

So wise up. I'm not telling you again.
ChaosControl said on 3/Sep/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Sep/21

Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.

Seems like a lot of effort for half an inch (that’s what she said)
ammy said on 2/Sep/21
looka 6'3 next to Ali
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Sep/21

Please stay up in your beanstalk so as to not scare adults and particularly little children. They might think you’re going to crush them underfoot or grind their bones for a nice sandwich. Or, at best, walk with a severe, height depleting hunch (actually, that might increase the “scary” factor, scratch that) OR figure out a way to fast track your spinal compression to below the magic threshold so you can walk among us normal folk.
Ian C. said on 2/Sep/21
You would think, just as a matter of simple logic, that tall people would lose more height in old age as an absolute measurement. They're taller and have more to lose. The question is, do tall and short people lose the same percentages of their youthful heights?

On average there can be little doubt that longevity favours short people over tall. Longevity is also far more prevalent among people with some body types. You can bet with confidence that Woody Allen, for example, will make it well into his nineties. He's short and strong, and also notably temperate in his personal habits. Apparently he has never drunk or smoked. He has not grown noticeably fatter with age, and his father made it to well past ninety.

Although you never can tell. Alfred Hitchcock and Peter Ustinov, both obese, made it into their eighties. Other people who seemed very strong, like Tyrone Power and Robert Shaw, died quite young of sudden heart attacks. Cancer is difficult to predict because it can strike down the young.

Clint's chances of making it to 100 are really quite good, although he is not only losing height but jettisoning weight. His muscles seem to be wasting away. His mind must be very good, and he can summon the energy to produce and direct movies, which would be strenuous labour at any age.

Not everyone who lives to be unusually old is all that happy about it, simply because old age robs you of much of the physical capacity you need to be comfortable and reasonably happy. Hunter S. Thompson and Ernest Hemingway ended their lives while they were still able to operate firearms, because both men had been reduced to little else but pain. I respect that, actually. In fact, if I were Clint's age, I would seriously consider skipping the last act.
ChaosControl said on 2/Sep/21
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21

Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most

So I’m just not supposed to exist until late in the evening after 7 hours of construction work or training hard in combat sports?
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
People who are near dead don't still make movies though, it takes tremendous energy and concentration to make and produce a film. Very stressful and time consuming for many, but CLint always made it look easier as he was so layed back during the filming. Actors loved working with him as he was so economical.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Sep/21
Not a hair under 6'3 till his 60s (the 1990s) in my opinion.
Tall Ssm said on 30/Aug/21
@Avi, strange statement, making those over 6’2” an aberration of what people are “meant to be”? Height loss can be more noticeable in taller people it’s true but I think genetics, health and lifestyle are the primary drivers.
avi said on 29/Aug/21
@Canson said on 22/Aug/21

Yes human body is really meant to be between 5'0 - 6'2 at most

Someone 6'3+ is going to have issues especially later in life. Of course plenty of average or even shorter older guys lose height or slump over but many taller guys (if they even make it to a decent old age) have a much more pronounced shrinkage.

I think Clint was a strong 6'3 in youth and now barely 6'0. He seemed to have been dipping in the 6'2 zone since the 1980s. It's hard to believe he lost 3 inches though. 1.5 seems to be more common
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Aug/21

Anecdotally, I can’t say that I’ve noticed if taller people do or don’t lose more height. Women are shorter on average than men and I have read that woman lose more height on average. As to confining the observation to one gender or the other, it would be interesting if there is anything out there taller men or women lose more height than their shorter, same sex counterparts.
James B 171.5 said on 24/Aug/21
tall in the saddle- I think it's mostly the tall folk who are prone to height loss as they age....
Tall In The Saddle said on 24/Aug/21

Yeah, it makes you want to be mindful to maintain your own posture, flexibility and bone health as best you can, not that it's always in anyone's complete control.

Not just to avoid notable loss of standing height but also being bent and bowed isn't desirable or healthy for a number of other obvious reasons anyway. Karl Malden is another celebrity that comes to mind as far as a severely bowed neck/back goes. I think he got to the point where his standing height was on par with Michael Douglas or perhaps even a bit less. I think he was a very solid 6'1" in his day but he did reach the grand old age of 97. With greater average life spans I guess we're going to see increased instances of extreme height loss, the rate of which seems to increase exponentially after a certain advanced age.
Canson said on 22/Aug/21
@Tall in the Saddle: I’ve noticed that a lot of the older celebs and older population who have lost noticeable height also have a major and very pronounced curve in the neck or the neck appears shorter for some reason lol. By noticeable height I mean someone like Clint or Donald Trump. Then you have the David Prowse category where he had lost even more than those guys. In his case, he already had a very large head which looked a bit disproportionate with a shorter (6’1) frame as opposed to a 6’5 or 6’6 frame that he once had
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Aug/21
Clint’s been directing himself for so long now and I don’t know that he would or even could take direction from anyone else. That was probably why he wanted to take over the reigns in the first place, for complete artistic control. But, I see your point, even as lead, Clint can convey an everyman quality often seen in character roles due to many of his subtle, nuanced characters. In Unforgiven I like how Clint starts out as your unassuming, average Joe farmer before turning into an almost supernatural Angel of Death by movies end. He was an easy target as he rode out of town but his chilling warnings and established aura was enough to cause them to lay down their guns as if they came to believe they were dealing with someone more than human. Sorry to rant but that’s such a great film.

A lying down measure could work, that’s if Clint can even sleep straight in bed these days. We all seem to agree though that without the kinks, he’d prob make 6 feet. Clint wasn’t quite 6’4” but there’s no argument that he’s a lost a ton of height, particularly by way of an ever shrinking torso.
Parker said on 19/Aug/21
Here's Clint filming the Mule with Bradley Cooper

Click Here

Think he could still have measured 6' 2-3 years ago.

Another one with Bradley in his mid 80's Click Here
ChaosControl said on 18/Aug/21
@T. I. T. S. Maybe you could get him at 6’0 lying down?
Hong said on 18/Aug/21
@Tall In The Saddle,in a perfect world Clint was indeed more in a supporting role and Costner as the lead,but Clint Directed it,it was his movie,what would be interesting is to see Clint in a movie in which he is just another actor,a movie Directed by someone else,Clint in someone else's movie playing a supporting Character.
Tall In The Saddle said on 18/Aug/21

Probably could hit 6 ft but I wouldn’t recommend Clint gut busting to get there for a number of reasons. At the least, they would have to have someone ready to catch him, just in case.


Off the top, A PERFECT WORLD is one film in which Clint receded from the lead role to assume a strong supporting role. Not a lot of air time during the film as I recall but powerful and significant input nonetheless.

Costner has made some not so great films but when he’s on his game he’s posted some great performances in the right movies. I don’t recall any good scenes to compare him with Clint but informal photos around that time seem to indicate a visible edge to Clint, as we might expect if Clint was standing about 6’ 2 1/2” as at the time.
viper said on 17/Aug/21
Clint may still hit 6-0 standing completely straight
Hong said on 17/Aug/21
He does look a bit ridiculous in the fighting scene and it looks like there is a bit of flirting going on between Clint and a woman who looks like she is only in her forties,and even in this movie he's wearing cowboy boots but because of his weak knees and hump it doesn't add any extra height.lm sure there are parts for elderly men in other movies,it would be interesting to see Clint in a movie where he is not the main character,to see him in a few character roles.I don't think since he hit the big time he's ever stared in any movie in which he was not the main guy.Maybe he's just to big a name and to type cast for people to see beyond all his legendary roles.Its a pity I'd say he would make a great Character in his very old age.
Ian C. said on 17/Aug/21
90 is nothing like 70, Hong. Most people who are 90 are dead.

I have seen the trailer to Cry Macho, and in it Clint punches somebody in the face. He also gives a much younger woman the eye. Well come on. I'm going to miss Clint when he's gone, but he's got that near-death look. He looks worse than Joe Biden. His spine is now severely misshapen, and he can't straighten his knees.

You can see how Clint looked when he was 70, in Space Cowboys. And old guy for sure, but still quite able-bodied. If Clint thinks that he looks anything like that now, he's severely deluded.

Robert Redford is another actor who thinks he looks younger than he is. Robert Redford played a sixty year-old in The Old Man and the Gun, when he was 82. I have been 60, and Redford looked a lot older than 60 to me. If you're young, you might be surprised how healthy and able-bodied 60 is. You're not 40 but you're not 80 either.
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Aug/21

So the book character is 38. Is the movie character being passed off as 70? Obviously that would've required some tweaks from book to screen play but then we still arrive at a 91 yo Clint in the role. This film has a real air of Gran Torino about it only Clint is 13 years older again. I'm not complaining, loved Gran Torino and I'll still definitely watch this one.
ChaosControl said on 15/Aug/21
Wait wait wait this 90 year old man is not just directing a movie, which would be impressive enough, but also starting in and producing it?
ChaosControl said on 15/Aug/21
Ian C. said on 15/Aug/21
I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.

I think of myself as straight out the womb
Ian C. said on 15/Aug/21
The book character is 38, Hong? There is no comparison, none, between the physical limitations of someone who is 38, and someone who is 70. (I know this because I'm 69, and I was once 38.) So a 90 year-old man playing a character whose problems were the same as a 38 year-old is an absurdity.

38 is a character age often favoured by male stars who who are 50 or older. James Bond of the novels is roughly that age, and stays that age no matter the year. It's as if aging men just think of themselves as 38.

I think of myself as 22. My thinking is, if I'm going to be delusional, i may as well pick a really pleasant delusion.
Tall In The Saddle said on 14/Aug/21
Well, this movie might just bag Clint the award for Best New Talent In the 90 year old and over category. Competition is scarce, a real gimme. Cry Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Hong said on 13/Aug/21
In the book the guy Clint is playing is 38 years old,it's a bit of stretch,but I suppose when you Direct,produce and star in the movie you can do what you like.
Andrea said on 13/Aug/21
In The Mule (back in 2018) he can really look barely 5'11... Maybe he could still stand taller than that for a measurement, but 6' is more than likely too much by now.
Ian C. said on 12/Aug/21
Has anyone in the history of the planet Earth produced, directed and starred in a motion picture at the age of 90? I used to flinch at actors in their 50s pretending that they were 35, and in fact Clint was guilty of that one in those Philo Beddoe movies. I'll be interested to see how old Clint's character is supposed to be in Cry Macho.

I've seen the trailer and Clint is collapsing into himself. He's heading for five foot nine, and he looks as if he can barely stand, let alone walk.
Tall In The Saddle said on 11/Aug/21

LOL. Well, if you had said that "something else", Rob might've been all over you like an STI. You don't want to run fowl of the Big Chief, El Macho Big Rob. This is a family site with a PG rating. Rob's XXX version of CH is apparently on the deep dark web for VIP (Very Introverted and Perverted) "members" only.
ChaosControl said on 11/Aug/21
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Aug/21

The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.

So what you’re saying is... it won’t turn out well if you say than a man has a small co...nsumable poultry animal. What, did you think I was gonna say something else?
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Aug/21

The last line in that trailer was a killer. Note to yourself, never name your rooster “tiny” or any other such diminutive label. Personally, I would opt for El Grande. LOL.

So many classic and somewhat sagacious lines from Clint’s movies have entered into the vernacular. So quotable and instantly understood. When you’re young like us you body carries you through despite yourself. However, at some point the body will begin to fail due to wear tear and ageing . That’s when the spirit has to increasingly take up the slack ultimately becoming the sole driving force.

That’s why, I think, when some older people feel it’s time, they simply let go, no longer having a body to automatically kick in and provide life support. It all just comes down to then and their will to live.

For the foreseeable future Clint isn’t going anywhere, the spirit is clearly strong and when the irresistible time comes he may have to be dragged out kicking and screaming. Many of his movies provide a good lesson on the meaning and value of life from varied perspectives.

I believe in due admiration and respect but not idolisation per se. I think when you idolise someone you begin to eclipse your own purpose in life but, if I was forced to nominate an idol perhaps Clint would be the closest thing to. Certainly an excellent role model in many respects, not the least being work ethic.
Hong said on 9/Aug/21
Click Here Here's the trailer for Clint's new movie,it's called Cry Macho.I think maybe he's a bit too old for the part?although he does get into a fist fight,I've got nothing but respect and admiration for the guy,91 years old and still active in the industry.
Editor Rob
Sometimes keeping active, using your mind and having purpose, lengthens our lifespan.
James B 171.5 said on 9/Aug/21
clint probably was 6'3 flat in 1988. a half inch loss from his peak
Tall In The Saddle said on 9/Aug/21
Good photos. On face value, without entertaining possible variables, Clint is standing well next to Liam in those pics. So I guess at that stage of his career (1988) you would view Clint as having undergone little or no height less, since you have peak Clint at 6'3" or barely above? Perhaps others might've guessed Clint to have lost a little bit of height by age 58.
Tall Sam said on 8/Aug/21
Yeah I believe there was info that Scott’s mom is rather short, at least a foot under Clint and the result of the womanizing Clints ongoing dalliances with a flight stewardess.
James B 171.5cm said on 8/Aug/21
Rob it seems Kyle Eastwood inherited the tall genes from his dad whereasas Scott Eastwood inherited the good looks (no homo)
Editor Rob
Sometimes genes are interesting...and throw up what you expect, and in other cases unexpected results. I believe they have different Mothers.
Tall In The Saddle said on 8/Aug/21
If Kyle was 6’2 1/2” peak I would guess it fair to give Clint about or close to 6’3” at least up until 1991. In my eyes he still edged Kyle who we can safely assume had stopped growing by 23 yo. Prob for me with Kyle is that I haven’t seen anyone to compare him with aside from Clint which can end up being a circular argument.

In Dead Pool 1988 I didn’t see any opportunities to properly compare Clint to Neeson. I think their longest scene together had Clint walking along on higher ground. Surely there would be offset photos of them together but ti date I’ve yet to see any.
Hong said on 7/Aug/21
@Arch Stanton,I wasn't aware Kyle claimed 6ft4,he definitely did not look that tall.
Rory said on 7/Aug/21
Id say weak 6ft3 for Clint by late 1980s, down from strong 6ft3 in the 60s/early 70s.
Arch Stanton said on 6/Aug/21
Comparison with Liam Neeson in 1988 and Clint with James Cromwell in 1989 I wouldn't put Clint under 6'3 in that period. He started looking more 6'2,5 into the 90s. I think 6'2.5 is probably about right for Kyle, he's definitely nowhere not 6'4 anyway and that's what he's claimed.
Tall In The Saddle said on 2/Aug/21

Yeah, the 6'4" listing for Kyle is more than curious. One listing has 193 cm converted to 6'3" so they obviously got that wrong in more ways than one. I wonder if they got the idea that Kyle was 6'4" at the point in time he stood level with Clint without accounting for Clint's height loss or the fact that Clint was never a full 6'4" himself. Of course there would've been some point in time when Clint had shrunk sufficiently for Kyle to see him eye to eye before Clint went on to lose even more height.
Hong said on 1/Aug/21
Yeah Tall In The Saddle,I agree,Clint at that stage was looking in the 6ft2.75 range,Kyle IMO never looked over 6ft2,but is listed as 6ft4 on line,I think the young peak Clint would have a good inch on Kyle.
Tall In The Saddle said on 31/Jul/21
Here’s a nice shot from 1991. 22 or 23 yo Kyle a bit slouched but 60 or 61 yo Clint I think would still be clearly taller even if Kyle straightened. There are better shots from the same time frame but I just linked the first one that came up. Wherever you have Clint at peak photos like this hammer home the unquestionable height loss Clint has experienced over the years.

Click Here
Tall In The Saddle said on 30/Jul/21
I perused a number of photos going back to 1989 to 1991 with Clint and Kyle (when Kyle was 21 to 23). I think it more than fair to give Clint about 1/2" over Kyle when Clint himself was in his very late 50's to just over 60 yo. If Kyle maxed at 6'2", then that puts Clint at about 6'2 1/2", which is the height I think most us believe he was by the age range in question.
Hong said on 30/Jul/21
Click Here Here's Kyle with Clint from 2008,Clint aged 78,at that time Clint was looking in the 6ft1 range,Kyle looks know more than 6ft2 there.It also shows how much Clint has shrank in the last 13 years.I think the young Clint was a fraction taller than Kyle.
Arch Stanton said on 29/Jul/21
Click Here

Difficult to see Kyle at 6'3 or over a lot of the time, maybe around 189cm is what he is.
Arch Stanton said on 29/Jul/21
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.

Rob said Kyle was more like 6 ft 2 flat! In a few photo comparisons certainly he didn't look over it. I've seen a number of his concerts and comparisons though I thought at times he could look 6'3 range. Undeniably he looks more like a 6'2 range guy in a lot of comparisons.
Tall In The Saddle said on 26/Jul/21

Nice collage. I guess based on the equal weighting of separate celebrity comparisons one might have to afford Conan 6’4” or very close to. Wrongly or rightly, I maybe giving more credence to the comparisons with more iconic celebs like Neeson, Lithgow, Hoff, Goldblum and Selleck who all edged Conan and whose own heights are reasonably confirmed. Conan also acknowledged the advantage of several of those guests by over estimating their heights.

I will also note that even when photographed multiple times with the same celeb (viz Barkley) , the apparent difference in height can vary somewhat due to obvious variables in play which just goes to show how deceiving photos can be sometimes. I actually see Liam Hemsworth pulling up even with O’Brien and I have Liam at 6’3 1/2”. To further corroborate that, I see Liam easily holding the same advantage (as Conan) over Goldblum in more recent years.
Tall Sam said on 24/Jul/21
Conan holds up very well against 6’3”ers like Will Ferrell, Billy Eichner and the now slightly shorter Jeff Goldblum, who at peak with arguably a smaller margin higher but is now roughly 0.5 under Conan IMO. He’d definitely have a bit of height I think on young Clint too but how much is hard to say, remember that a young Clint held up very well near George Kennedy who was certainly no shorter than Conan.
Tall In The Saddle said on 23/Jul/21

Agreed. Both disproportionally long arms and/or legs can be revealing legacies of a once much taller person. Clint is an ideal example of same. TBH, Clint had a shorter than average torso to begin with but it has compressed that much more with the ensuing years combined with a number of worsening postural kinks.

I wonder what Clint weighs these days? Hard to say but I might guess 147 lbs to 154 lbs? Naturally, a llot of muscle and bone density has been lost.


At least for me it’s harder to estimate big height differentials (viz Conan vs Leno) where the taller person’s advantage can tend to be over guessed or over claimed. As far as Conan’s height goes, I prefer guys who are closer to Conan’s range with their own reasonably confirmed heights like Selleck, Neeson, Goldblum, Lithgow, etc. For me, that allows for finer calibration and the conclusion that O’Brien is not 6’4” but maybe 6’3 1/2” at best. Just an opinion of course.
David Tang said on 23/Jul/21
6'4 peak. 6'0 now. hey rob. have you seen eastwood with schwarzenegger. these two both shrunk a ton. eastwood lost 3.5. schwarzenegger lost 2.5
Editor Rob
Eastwood has reached a good age, but the height loss is more than Arnie...

if Arnie reaches 90 though, I believe on this site there will be arguments whether he is 5ft 9 or 9.5!
Tall In The Saddle said on 22/Jul/21
Yeah, I also estimate both Coop and Stewart to be over 6’3”, more likely closer to the 6’3 1/2” mark if not bang on. IMO Stewart def. had the edge on Coop as slight as it was and both guys could look equal to or slightly taller than The Duke at times.

Wayne def. taller than Scott also but I just think it was closer than the cowboy boot westerns suggest and certainly Scott wasn’t dropping 1 1/2” as this site’s listings imply. Interesting, when looking for same, there aren’t a lot of photos of Mel Ferrer with comparably tall actors. Found one with Coop, not the best but they appeared reasonably on par.
Hong said on 22/Jul/21
Click Here Jay Leno is listed here as 5ft11 peak,Here's Jay with Conan.Conan looks a comfortable 5 inches taller in fact he makes Jay look closer to 5ft10.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here I know this is Clint's page so I don't want to get immersed in a debate about Conan's height,but Here's Conan in 2009 with Dolph lundgren,if Conan was 6ft3.5 that would put Lundgren at 6ft1.5 max 6ft2 aged 52.Lundgren was still looking in the 6ft3 range at that stage,and was a solid 6ft4 peak.
Rory said on 21/Jul/21
You can see though in the photo with Kyle that his legs look the same length or longer than Kyle's,which is often a give away for older people who have lost height. Ive seen plenty of elderly guys out there really stooped and hunched over, but you can tell by their leg length that they were much taller in their youth. Clint now still has the legs of a 191cm guy but the torso of a guy whose about 174cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 21/Jul/21
Yeah, without any due nip and tuck for possible inequities, that photo in its own right might justify a 6’4” estimate for Conan but i wouldn’t say strong, rather, just on the mark. Of all the photos of the pair together, that photo suggests the biggest difference. Other photos indicate Will to be that bit closer in height I think.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
@Canson,I have to disagree,even if Farrell stood straighter I still think Conan looks about 1.5 inches taller.
Hong said on 21/Jul/21
Click Here Here's the 91 year old Clint with his son Kyle,he looks very frail now,it's hard to believe he was once as tall if not taller than Kyle.
Canson said on 20/Jul/21
@Hong: you can’t see anything below the shirts in that pic. But this one is more and this is more likely a 6’2.5 Farrell who is not standing as well as Conan. Conan looks 6’3.5 at best with him. That’s about what he most likely is given Hasselhoff and Neeson both being taller than him at 6’4”. also looks that with Barkley Kobe or Gronkowski

Click Here
Hong said on 20/Jul/21
Click Here On the subject of Conan,this is Conan with 6ft2.5 listed Will Ferrell,and remember Farrell is listed as 6ft3 peak,this is not a guy struggling with 6ft4,in fact Conan looks a clear 6ft4 in comparison to Farrell,unless of course Farrell is not as tall as he is listed.
Tall In The Saddle said on 20/Jul/21

Yeah, that's the thing. Even if we're only a little bit out (albeit acceptably) on our estimates for each of the other individuals we can perhaps end up with an accumulated margin of error falling upon our target estimate (viz Clint) which may be quite off the mark. A Leaning Tower of Pisa so to speak. As cowboy boot heels go, Clint's appear regular I think, perhaps as minimal a cowboy boot heel could be. I recall Clint Walker's acute heel from SEND ME NO FLOWERS and they make Clint's cowboy heel look like a regular shoe heel. LOL. Aside from estimating their heights, which is really just a casual thing for me, I more enamored with the mere existence of the clip from the Danny Kaye show with such stars as Clint, Fess and Buddy. Awesome. There is also of course Clint's appearance on the FROST show which I had never seen until a few years ago. YouTube is a godsend.
Tall In The Saddle said on 19/Jul/21
@Tall Sam

No prob bro. Clint and Conan might be among the more hotly contended height listings on this site but differences of opinion, equally valid, really only involve a general range of only 1/4" to 1/2" for either guy, either way. I guess, as per my own estimates, Clint's best case vs Conan's worst case might have them even. So, all things being equal on average I would give Conan the edge over Clint also.
Hong said on 19/Jul/21
@ Tall In The Saddle,Good idea to post the Danny Kaye show video again.Parker is listed as 6ft5.5,taking in to account his footwear which seems quite flat,he would probably be standing around 6ft6 or max 6ft6.5,he looks to have about 3 inches on Clint,that would make Clint plus cowboy boots 6ft3.5,plus minus 1.5 inches for boots that would make Clint 6ft2 flat,now because we can't say exactly how high Clint's boots were or how tick Parkers footwear was and Clint did look similar to Ebsen who generally looked in the 6ft3 range,we will give Clint the benefit of the doubt.But this video definitely rules out 6ft4 for Clint's height unless Parker was 6ft7?Also Ebsen was in his late 50s at the time and my have lost a fraction of height by then.So Clint being below 6ft3 peak is not completely out of the question,so I think 6ft3 peak is more than fair.
Tall Sam said on 18/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle, thanks for the nice comments. Yeah, I would say Conan is definitely a little taller peak, more of a legit 6’4” guy, although sometimes looks on the weak side for the mark. However, maybe it’s not as much as it seems because I believe I’ve seen Clint pull off 6’3.5” range at certain times.
James B 171.5cm said on 18/Jul/21
Rob I remember when you downgraded clints peak to 6’3.5 you said that would be the final peak height you would give him.

Does that rule out a future a downgrade to 6’3.25? From what I understand your not convinced he was just 6’3 flat in his prime
Dr Decker said on 17/Jul/21
Had an least inch on Lee van cleef. (6-2) legit imo peak.
James B 171.5cm said on 17/Jul/21
I don’t rule out 6’3.25 for clints peak
Tall In The Saddle said on 17/Jul/21
Here's a link to footage that was provided some time back on this thread. A good time for a refresh.

The Danny Kaye Show, host 5'11" listed Danny Kaye featuring 6'3 1/2" listed Clint, 6'5 1/2" listed Fess Parker and 6'3" listed Buddy Ebsen. Click Here

I will note that Buddy Ebsen once said that when he began filming the series Davy Crockett (series run '54 to '55), he himself stood 6'3 1/4" next to Fess' 6'5 1/2". The clip in question was filmed in 1965, some 10 year since that series with Buddy being aged 57 and heading into potential height loss territory if not already there.

Also, worthy to note that Ebsen began filming the Beverly Hillbillies in 1962. At that time, in comparable footwear, he appeared about 1" shorter than legit 6'4" Max Baer Jr. During the series run Ebsen's gradual loss of height could be observed and when the series wrapped in 1971, he was that little bit shorter again that Max Baer Jr.

At least in the opening sequences, Clint has the singular advantage of cowboy boot heel over Kaye, Buddy and Fess. IMO, even so, if not holding the slightest of edges, Clint appears about the same height as Ebsen and 2" plus shorter than Fess. He does appear an arguable 4" taller than Kaye, but that's at a max. So, all cross referencing appears to reconcile Clint to be standing manifestly at around the 6'3" mark but again, that's in cowboy boot heel.

In balance, there are many more examples in favor of 6'3" plus for Clint but I have to say that for the purposes of comparison this footage presents as perhaps the best quality evidence but not necessarily the be all and end all to the discussion.
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jul/21
@James B@Hong

Gotcha. Thanks.
Hong said on 16/Jul/21
I've always seen Conan as a legitimate 6ft4.
James B 171.5 said on 16/Jul/21
I mean taller than clint
Tall In The Saddle said on 16/Jul/21
@James B

Re Conan, did you mean a little taller or shorter than Clint? I’m guessing you mean the former but not sure.
Canson said on 15/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle: all good my man! And I agree with what you eloquently said. I do take into consideration being I was once one of them, that those who see under 6’3 may be looking at later footage of him
James B 171.5cm said on 15/Jul/21
Nah I always imaged Conan as a little than Clint
Tall In The Saddle said on 15/Jul/21

No drama but for clarity that be Tall Sam’s comment you replied to. Good to see the original Tall Man (and the best) posting again. My moniker has caused some confusion at times but I’ll always take any credit for Tall Sam’s wisdom. Lol.

As it happens I agree with both you guys though Clint’s television appearance beside Ebsen and Fess Parker had Clint, who was the only one wearing cowboy boots in the opening skits, curiously appearing to be barely scraping 6’3” and the vision was pretty good for comparison purposes. Hong knows of these examples and basing an opinion ONLY on then one might seriously submit an estimate a touch below 6’3”.

Also, next to Ali on the Frost show, It seemed Clint did edge Ali but only slightly but it still had to be a min. 1/2” advantage for it to be even discernible. Some might’ve seen a 1” advantage to Clint but personally I didn’t quite see that much, maybe 3/4” at best?.

However, I guess there is that much more weight of evidence for 6’3” + estimate, jus in my opinion. So yeah, a 6’3 1/4” to 6’3 1/2” sounds fair. Lol, as some of us have him, we could be talking Conan O’Brien instead of Clint. So I guess we’ve kind of got O’Brien and Eastwood more or less equal at their peaks. Clint would’ve also had Conan covered in terms of high hair.
Hong said on 15/Jul/21
@Canson,6ft3.25 is a fair assessment for Clint's peak,6ft4 morning height is probably closer to his peak, and 6ft3.25 standing tall for measurment in the evening.But he did have a bad habit of slouching which made him seem a tad shorter in pics for comparison with other actors.
Canson said on 15/Jul/21
@Tall in the Saddle: yea that’s where I would start is no less than 6’3 but a strong 6’3 like 6’3.25” is a good possibility. 6’3.5 is also possible peak height (afternoon/evening). But I believed at one time that he could’ve been somewhere around what Bobby said likely because I saw more of him after he begun to lose height.
Canson said on 14/Jul/21
@Hong: maybe not the classic 6’4” guy but Eastwood was at least a solid 6’3” at his peak. He could pass for 6’3.5 at times
Tall Sam said on 14/Jul/21
@Bobbyh3342, I'd be surprised if Eastwood at peak was not taller than Affleck, the latter is a slightly strong 6'2" whereas Clint usually managed to pull off 6'3" and change IMO. I could seem at times as low as 6'3", around the height of someone like Sacha Baron Cohen, for Eastwood.
Rory said on 14/Jul/21
I dont really get people who say Eric Fleming was taller than Clint. From most of what ive seen of the two of them they look the same or if anything Clint looks taller.

I think for some people theyve kind of persuaded themselves that young Clint was 6ft2.75, and now search frantically to prove that theory, ignoring evidence to the contrary and relying on scarce, unreliable evidence to back up their claims. I think the most credible height guessers amongst us know Clint was 6ft3+.
Tall In The Saddle said on 13/Jul/21

To be clear, the photos you provide are fine, even handed without bias and are always definitely worthy for comparison purposes to some degree or another. Obviously we take what we can get, some photos being better than others, some requiring less account for variables such as footwear, surface, postures etc. The most recent photo is very good and, in its own right, suggests little to choose between Clint and Eric. Clint maybe slightly closer to camera and Eric perhaps could gain a touch more if he was fully straight. Still, not much in at all and it really requires a broad sampling to sort out who really has the edge, otherwise, so close to call maybe more practical to just call them even.

If you're interested, maybe pop up to John Wayne's page. I would be interested in your view on the most recently linked vision. If I get a chance, I'm going to link another clip from Big Jim McLain to compare Wayne against another costar.
Sinclair said on 13/Jul/21
The more I see of Clint at peak, the more I deduce he was 6’3.5” maximum. I now agree if anyone was taller out of Fleming and Clint, it was probably Fleming. Fleming nearly always looked taller than Clint on Rawhide. However, I’d put them both at 6’3.5”. In the first episode of Rawhide, Fleming was clearly taller than 6’3” listed Frank Wilcox. Nowadays, Clint is shorter than Tom Hanks, so if Hanks is 5’11.5” now, Clint may well be struggling with 5’11” today.
Tony G said on 13/Jul/21
Clint was more than 1.5 inches taller than 6'1" David Soul. Check out both of them standing together in the movie "Magnum Force."
Hong said on 13/Jul/21
@Bobbyh3342,you could be right,it is possible.
Bobbyh3342 said on 13/Jul/21
clint eastwood is a classic 6 2.5 guy that claims 6'4 just like ben affleck,,, Clint was a legend and one of my favorite actors, but was never near 6'4 in his barefeet
Hong said on 13/Jul/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,you could be right about Fleming being a bit taller,and yes the pic was not the best for comparison.Ive posted another one which both guys are standing next to each other,it's very close Fleming my have a slight edge.It could be 1m90.5 for Clint and 1m9.5 for Fleming that's how close it looks to me.If Fleming was taller it was only marginal 1cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 11/Jul/21

Yeah, I know that photo. Of course Fleming is barefoot and standing on lower ground and next to Clint he is standing impossibly shorter than than we reasonably know him to be.
In the group photo the background wall is a stand out first reference point. Even with that, Arness isn’t standing as high as we know him to be IMO. Perhaps angle etc. and also Arness breaking posture somewhat. I think Fess held equal or better advantage over Clint as seen on television but we also know Arness was clearly taller than Fess. Also, Henry Calvin is standing too well next to Arness.
Agreed. When actors are close in height or even equal, the advantage will see saw due to slight surface, foot wear and posture inequities. Over the whole landscape I’d still give Fleming the edge.
The photo you provided my be among the best for comparison purposes. Acceptably flat surface, equally heeled cowboy boots assumed with Fleming holding the manifest edge. But also, Fleming’s head is on a slight tilt and his feet are spaced more than Clint’s, the latter actually standing pretty straight for a change. :)
Hong said on 11/Jul/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,I don't know about Fleming being taller,remember this Pic? but that's like arguing who was taller Caine or Connery? both were so similar one could look taller than the other and sometimes but in general they both looked the same height.By the way in the pic I posted with Arness you can use the line in the wall behind them to gauge their heights.
Tall In The Saddle said on 10/Jul/21
Again you’ve located another great, rarely seen photo.

Interesting that Arness appears to be standing that bit less than his true height. Remember how tall Fess Parker appeared next to Clint? Anyway, Fleming does look a bit taller than Clint. Over many photos and vision I would give Fleming the edge in general. The actor next to Arness is Henry Calvin who played Sergeant Garcia in the old Zorro series starring Guy Williams.

Williams was a rock solid 6’2” at the least IMO and Calvin never appeared more than 1” shorter.
Hong said on 9/Jul/21
Click Here Here's a pic With 6ft6 to 6ft7 range James Arness,once again it's a pity Arness is not standing next to Clint but Eric Fleming is and looks slightly taller but from other pic's I posted before that can flucttuat between Clint and Fleming,both guys are near enough the same height.But as you can see Arness 8s clearly the tallest on the pic.
Hong said on 7/Jul/21
@Tall In The Saddle,I didn't realise Lynn Redgrave was so tall,if she was 5ft10 then Sommer was still 6ft3 range next to her. Both clips,Clint with Sommer and Everett with Sommer are not the best for height comparison the angles are odd.I would be more inclined to go for 1m90.5 for Clint's peak and now he's looking in the 1m80cm, range he might be able to stretch to 1m83cm,but is consistently looking like a 1m 80cm guy in his early 90s.
Tall In The Saddle said on 7/Jul/21

Yeah, still pics can sometimes be a bit deceiving. Angle isn't great, Sommers posture isn't as good as Everett's and he is older as we've said but then Sommers is in the foreground for some perceptual advantage. I found the live vision more revealing and I'd guess about 1" between them. Not at all improbable for Sommers to have lost 1/2" by that time to work back to a 6'3 1/2" peak. Then it comes back to how much we think he had on Clint, and again, their scene together unfortunately doesn't provide ideal proximity and angle but based on that vision in its own right, I agree that Sommers appeared to have the edge.

Interesting to note, the great actress Lynn Redgrave is also in the photo and her peak height is listed as 5'10", which I think is about right.


For Clint, I think 191 cm max. with 190.5 still possible. His standing, effective height is now below 6 feet I think but if straightened for a nano second, he might just make the 6 feet mark or barely below it.
slim 6'1 said on 7/Jul/21

I think 191 -181 is more probable
Rory said on 6/Jul/21
Clints height today is impossible to guess really, theres no way of telling what a guy like him could measure compared to how he looks other than to say hed probably be between 5ft11 and six foot. His peak is also quite difficult to pin down because of loose posture, but then his thick hair kind of counteracted that too at times.

I could probably buy 6ft3.25 peak and 5ft11.5 today. I could never buy under 6ft3 anyway, and maybe 6ft3.5 as a maximum. Not so sure about that clip with Sommer, not exactly a good comparison, theyre not really in close proximity and the camera angle is a bit unorthodox.
Hong said on 6/Jul/21
Click Here @ Tall In The Saddle,Here's a pic from that movie and Everett definitely is the taller guy,Sommer at 66 years old would probably be less than peak,but it's all pointing to Clint being no more than 6ft3 peak maybe even 6ft2.75,or 1m90cm,I know that seems a bit controversial,but I think it's a possibility.
Tall In The Saddle said on 6/Jul/21

Thanks for the clip. I found a trailer for a movie THE NEXT BEST THING made in 2000. There’s a scene with Sommers and 6’4” listed Rupert Everett. Everett is clearly taller. The angles vary but at best Sommers appear perhaps 1” shy of Everett’s height. Of course Sommers age as as that time, 66 yo, has to be factored.
ChaosControl 6'2.50 said on 6/Jul/21
What’s more likely,191 down to 181 or 192 down to 182?
Popper plop said on 4/Jul/21
Shrunk lots. Sub 6-0 imo now from a 6-3.5 peak
Hong said on 4/Jul/21
Click Here In The Saddle,Here's the scene there in together in Dirty Harry,Sommer looks the taller guy but it's not100% clear because of the camera angles, so the still pic I posted is the best for comparison.
Tall In The Saddle said on 4/Jul/21

Yeah, I remember that actor (Josef Sommer). Good actor. I recall he appeared in quite a few movies but I never knew his name. Agreed, he does look to have the edge on Clint, an edge you might guess to be at least 1/2" to be discernible. I found one other photo of them from the same movie and scene with the POV being from behind Clint's back and at least as I saw it, the edge appeared pretty much the same.
Hong said on 2/Jul/21
Click Here The guy with Clint is Josef Sommer he's listed as 6ft3.5 on line,U don't know much about him but he looked to have the edge on Clint in their scene together,he looks a bit taller than Clint in the pic.
Tall In The Saddle said on 29/Jun/21

I thought I was Robinson Crusoe re my estimate for McMahon. LOL.

He’s a great yardstick to measure against numerous Carson guests. There’s a clip of Eastwood appearing on Carson in 1973. Virtually every other celebrity clip will include the walk on and hand shake with Carson and sidekick McMahon. I couldn’t believe they edited out at Clint’s walk on and commenced the clip just as Clint was taking his seat. The full vision of 43 yo Clint’s appearance must be out there and would be very interesting to see.
Dr Decker said on 29/Jun/21
6-3.5 peak
Hong said on 28/Jun/21
I mentioned to post that on the Christopher Reeve page.
Canson said on 28/Jun/21
@Tall in the Saddle: that’s where I would place McMahon too. 191-192 range. 6’3.5 is a good fit
Hong said on 28/Jun/21
Click Here Here's a good pic with Hackman,he's only looking about an inch taller here.
Tall In The Saddle said on 27/Jun/21

Not a great shot to judge Clint alongside Chris Isaac. I could only find one other which was equally poor. I dunno. As at 1993 I might afford Clint up to 6’2 1/2” given all stills and vision. Certainly, he was standing well clear if Gene Hackman who was possibly just 6’1” himself by that stafe.. I could link lots of photos to argue for it but realistically there are also a good number of photos to challenge it. There are somw pics from the 1993 Oscars in which Clint appears equal to or holding a slight edge over Morgan. Also, I’m not so sure that Morgan stood a flat 6’2” himself by then, perhaps a touch taller.

Clint also appeared on Carson in 1993 to discuss UNFORGIVEN.. I would estimate a 1/2” difference between he and Ed McMahon. IMO, McMahon was more like 6’3 1/2” peak and was perhaps down to 6’3” by 1993. Ali appeared on Carson a few times with McMahon clearly taller by at least 1/2”, probably a touch more.

Did Morgan ever appear on Carson? I dunno but it would be worthwhile checking to see how he himself might’ve stood next to McMahon.
Rory said on 26/Jun/21
I wouldn't say Morgan was taller than Clint in the early 90s. In fact my money would be on Clint measuring taller in the early 90s.Obviously in the last 20 yrs Morgan has consistently looked the taller and has held on to his height much better than Clint has.

Click Here

Click Here

A good 5 inches taller than Nicholson at the time too. Id say 6ft2.5 for Clint in the early 90s.

Click Here
Hong said on 26/Jun/21
Click Here Here's 63 year old Clint with 6ft.5 listed Chris Isaak,Clint was definitely no taller than 6ft2 in 1993 around the time of Unforgivin,so him and Freeman would have been the same height at that time but Clint was definitely not taller.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21

Yeah my recollection of the movie matches your descriptions but I just saw it a bit different on rewatch, note ing how much even slight angle changes could alter how tall they appeared. Also back then Clint lost a bit in relaxed posture but every now and then he’d manage to stand straight. As at least 1993 I have Clint at about 6’2 1/2” so he could only be shorter if anything by the time of the movie.

People got away with platforms in the 70s because they were a big part of the fashion landscape so I guess some less tall folk took gained some advantage without standing out too much. But then if everyone was wearing them the advantage was cancelled out. LOL. But I agree our man Clint wasn’t given to extra heel..

Also I don’t know that Cromwell had Clint by a full 4” but then Cromwell himself might’ve been down from his peak 6’6 1/2”.

As to Morgan, when I first saw him in movies I would have probably guessed solid 6’3”.
Hong said on 25/Jun/21
At the time Dirty Harry was made,platform heels were in fashion,a lot of men wore them so Clint would have been at a disadvantage in his regular heeld shoes on many occasions,some of those platform heels could be as high as 3 inches,just look at Kojac,Telly Savalas wore massive ones in that series . It's just a point that people don't usually think about.
Hong said on 25/Jun/21
Click Here @Tall In The Saddle,It looked to me that Sutherland was taller than Clint in Space Cowboys,Clint was looking in the 6ft1 to 6ft2 range at age 70,he was only marginally taller than 6ft Tommy Lee Jones and looked a good 4 inches shorter than 6ft6 James Cromwell,but the one who looked shortest was James Garner he looked around the 5ft11 range,considering he was 6ft1.5 at peak he looks to have lost over 2 inches by age 72.As for Morgan Freeman it's frustrating that there are no good comparison's between Clint and Morgan in Unforgiven,my own personal opinion is that Clint and Morgan would have been similar in height at the time,Morgan can look 6ft3 sometimes like in the movie Street Smart he was only a fraction shorter than 6ft3.5 Christopher Reeve.IMO even at their peaks Clint and Morgan would have been very close in height,maybe with Clint having a slight edge,but that's only because Clint was listed 6ft4 and Morgan 6ft2,but I think 6ft2.75 for Morgan and 6ft3 for Clint were more their acutal heights.I just posted the pic from dirty Harry just to show the footwear Clint wore during that movie,some people seem to think he was always in Cowboy boots.There just a standard heel problem Couple of cm.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21

Whoa! Redmond is only 36 yo but looks a lot older. A shame. Besides all else, he's lived a pretty hard life, including heroin use and jail time. I don't believe in people blaming their parents for what they become. At some point, you take the reins on your own life, assume responsibility and navigate your own course. I mean, the parents can reach back too and blame it on their own upbringing. Such lack of accountability would never stop and only serve to excuse negative repetition. For some, early life hardships in fact turn them into better people. Having said that, I don't think Ryan O'Neal would've ever been considered for Father of the Year. I mean, he's been estranged from most of his children at one time or another and they all seem to point to psychological scarring from their childhoods, underscored by O'Neal's chronic cheating. Ryan O'Neal always struck me as a non charitable, totally self centered, egotistical individual for whom children were a mere by product. I think both Tatum and Griffin were born to Joanna Moore who wasn't a bad looker in her day. Redmond of course was born to Farrah Fawcett who I personally didn't find particularly attractive but I know millions did and good luck to her for that. Out of the Angels, I was a Jaclyn Smith fan, she was beautiful but even she is looking a bit" not of this earth" these days. Too much knife work.
Tall In The Saddle said on 25/Jun/21

Yeah, some photos are confusing. I don't think it just comes down to angles with a regular lens. It seems, for the sake of creativity and/or fitting in to frame, they use semi fish eye lens' or what not, creating surreal framing and presentation. Clearly, photographers and video makers are not on board with or interested in our goals to estimate height. LOL.
At least during and since UNFORGIVEN, Clint might've been shorter than Morgan. They were never framed in the above movie to allow for a realistic estimate though some still shots could make them either appear equal or give Morgan the edge.

The movie SPACE COWBOYS was replayed the other night. Interesting to see, while the actors held their position and the camera rotated, the illusory change in apparent height advantages or disadvantages. Watching the film overall, you could get a fair impression of their heights but in any given moment, if a still photo was taken or you paused the video, you could easily get a false perception. We're sort of mainly confined to still pics on this forum and we try to offer reasonably true camera views as single points in time evidence. However, I personally find live vision of reasonable duration as a better source for estimations.

Having said that, in SPACE COWBOYS, my memory had Clint notably shorter than Sutherland. Upon seeing the film again, Clint wasn't standing too badly though Sutherland did manage to out slouch Clint. No mean feat. Anyway, it seemed at different times they shared either equal advantage or disadvantage while otherwise they appeared quite comparable.
Hong said on 24/Jun/21
Click Here @Rob,yeah Here's a pic from the same event,now Morgan is taller.
Editor Rob
yeah in a few photos it seems more obvious Morgan was taller than Clint a good inch or so
Hong said on 23/Jun/21
Click Here @Rob this pic always puzzles me,at the time it was taken Morgan always seemed to have about an inch on Clint,but in this one it is reversed,I would be interested to know your opinion on this.
Editor Rob
could be Morgan standing with looser posture
Arch Stanton said on 23/Jun/21
Agreed, many celebrities tend to be much better looking than their children though we tend to forget how much surgery or pampering they've had to look that good, David Beckham is a good example. Some celebs who were very good looking couples sometimes even have very average to ugly children. Ryan O'Neal and Farrah Fawcett's son Click Here looks like a carpet fitter from Pontypridd LOL.
Tall In The Saddle said on 21/Jun/21
On the flip side, sometimes the good looking genes of celebrity parents don’t necessarily pass down or combine for equally good looking offspring. Sometimes, the kids don’t even come close.

Then there are those kids born to already heavily faced lifted celebrity and parents, including perfectly tweaked noses. They might be like, “Where the hell did I get this huge proboscis from?”
Hong said on 19/Jun/21
I think the article saying he's 6ft3 was the truth.
Hong said on 17/Jun/21
@Pierre,the John Wayne pic is just not a good pic for height comparison unfortunately,but I do agree that Wayne would have been closer to 6ft4 at peak than Clint,who was more a in the 6ft3 range.
Arch Stanton said on 16/Jun/21
I wouldn't have been able to guess those were Clint's parents from a photo though. Doesn't look much like them at all. Clint's dad looks more like Bing Crosby! Some celebs I've noticed have been extremely lucky and end up much better looking than you'd expect from a set of genes.

Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.

Other vital statistics like weight or shoe size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.

Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.