Add a Comment735 comments
Average Guess (192 Votes)
5ft 9.97in (177.7cm)
Chris said on 29/Oct/08
Daniel Craig is NOT 6 ft, hes not even 5.11. I saw him at the premier for Quantum of Solace today in Leicester Square, im 5.9, hes my height, he walked past where i was standing, i assure you, no taller than 5.10 even in shoes or lifts.
glenn said on 26/Oct/08
if i have time i would love to.i loved the first one for him.
Drew G said on 26/Oct/08
Daniel Craig is 5'9. I met him, I am 6feet and he was a good few inches shorter than me. I had Converse All-Stars on which are flat and he had heeled boots on!
Anonymous said on 26/Oct/08
It has often been remarked that he was too short to portray bond who was described by Ian Fleming as,'183 cm and 76 kg'. I thought he looked at least 5' 10" in 'Casino Royale' and I suppose if he is, it wouldn't exactly to ground breaking special effects to make him look 6 feet.
Roger said on 25/Oct/08
Glenn, will you watch "Quantum of Solace"?
glenn said on 25/Oct/08
looked 5-11 when i saw him.though i agree he can look 5-10,and even 5-9ish to me in some bond scene.
said on 24/Oct/08
On second thought, he does look like he could be 5'11" here next to 5'9" Gwyneth PaltrowClick Here
Both are barefoot obviously.
RisingForce said on 24/Oct/08
Roger says on 13/Sep/08
I'm still waiting for RisingForce to come here, claiming a 5'11'' min. for Daniel.
Actually I think he's 5'10".
said on 22/Oct/08
Compare to 5ft7 Jamie Bell: Click Here
looks to be struggling to be 2" taller at most.
anonymous said on 22/Oct/08
He was shorter than nicole kidman in the golden compass but she had heels on. I would say 5 foot 11 - 6 foot max.
Bruce said on 18/Oct/08
am in the biggest shock because i thought he was 6'0" tall
Mr. R said on 18/Oct/08
Craig was on The Jay Leno show tonite. Both entering and leaving he was standing next to Jay and he was definitely an inch shorter, if not a little more.
beatlefan said on 11/Oct/08
I think craig has done the right thing in not admitting his height, he is an enigmatic character and by doing this his height is now also a mystery. He is clearly in the mid average range anyway 5'9" to 5'11".
Anonymous said on 10/Oct/08
A good spy isn't supposed to stand out...or be remarkable in any way, right?
yeh but james bond is
Marcustheswede said on 10/Oct/08
Seems like nice guy.I thought he was much taller.Like Beckham or closer to 180cm..It feel strange to think for example Brad Pitt is taller then him...I like Mr Pitt s
adam said on 9/Oct/08
And Anonymous was once again me. My computer is full of viruses or something.
Anonymous said on 9/Oct/08
Certainly not more than 5-10
sts said on 7/Oct/08
His height is probably just average, which is right for the part. A good spy isn't supposed to stand out...or be remarkable in any way, right?
said on 2/Oct/08
There's a bunch of trailer/clips on yahoo, and in one of them Gemma appears to be wearing a tan boot with approx 2" heel, making 5'9. Craig looks to be an inch or so taller, but wearing shoes that could easily house lifts. I think he's 5'9-5'9.5 but no taller.Click Here
Roger said on 2/Oct/08
Rob, I think you make a mistake by listing DC at more than 5'10''.
You might remember the incident where 5'7'' Gemma Arterton was taller than DC when she was in heels, and how this lead to him having to wear lifts.
Now, DC wears normal shoes in this scene - and I don't think heels measure more than 3 inches. If they did, why didn't the director just change her shoes? There certainly are high heels available that make a 5'7'' woman no more than 5'10.5'' with them on.
Will you give my suggestion a thought to change DC to 5'9.75''?
Bob said on 30/Sep/08
I will concede he may be 177.875 cm, but that is stretching things.
(No pun intended)
said on 24/Sep/08
Here's the pic I referred to, while not a level accurate angle, it certainly appears there's a difference of 2+ inches, from where I sit:Click Here
Anonymous said on 24/Sep/08
There's a pic of him with Tom Hanks on yahoo movies page, where Hanks looks several inches taller (and he's 5'11 ish).
Anonymous said on 20/Sep/08
shorter than 5'11", taller than 5'10 thats a fact.
Matt said on 19/Sep/08
Blimey, Bob! Never seen somebody get so passionate about a quarter-of-a-centimeter! :)
Mary said on 17/Sep/08
Does anyone know Daniel Craig's shoe size?
Bob said on 15/Sep/08
There is no way he is 178 cm, he is 177.75 cm MAX!
Roger said on 13/Sep/08
I'm still waiting for RisingForce to come here, claiming a 5'11'' min. for Daniel.
Seriously though, 5'10'' is the max for Daniel - leaning stronger to 177 cm than 178 cm. A set report from Bregenz, Austria stated how a woman was disappointed because Daniel Craig is too short for a Bond.
Rob said on 6/Sep/08
I'm 5'9.5 and I have the same sort of thing as Craig. Obviously not as much since he is a celeb but you know what I mean. People who guess my height put me anywhere between 5'8 - 5.11 because the 5'9 5'10 height can look tall or short depending on how a person holds themselves etc. Therefore Craig must be in this strange height range as well and is between the 5'9.5 to 5.10.5 range as he appears short in Sylvia and tallish in Bond. I suppose you can argue he wears lifts in Bond but you would have thought he would have done so in Sylvia as well as Paltrow is quite tall for a women and only had about an inch off him making her 5'8 or 5'9. I dont know what it is that is only a guess. I think an accurate height count for Craig is a inch more then Paltrow whatever that is.
said on 6/Sep/08Click Here
uk/us news doesnt seem to have this item
Trace said on 1/Sep/08
Actually 5'10" was exactly the height people start to say that I am tall...
But in the USA everybody seems to be obsessed with being 6ft.Like anybody could see the difference between 5'10" and 5'11" or 5'11 and 6'
Dural said on 31/Aug/08
Graig is more like 5'9.5" and Casino Royale wasn't worth watching it. I would be surprised if "Quantum of Solace" is better.
A 5'10" Man said on 31/Aug/08
Amen, Matt. 5'10" is too short to look tall, but too tall to look short. Just nice and average!
As for Craig, I reckon 5'10" on the mark but I agree that people at 5'10" nobody seems to believe and assumes they must be taller or shorter (as you mentioned being moved down to 5'9" or up to 5'11!)
Matt said on 30/Aug/08
Funny that some people think he is around 5'11". That's just insane. It has been comprehensively proven on this site that he consistently gets soundly beaten by co-stars who are 5'11"+.
To be honest you need only use the naked eye to gauge a fairly accurate height for Craig. A genuine 5'11" star has the ability to look tall. It is as simple as that. In just about every photo we have of Craig, his body proportions clearly let him down. The leg length just isn't there. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why a 5'11" Brad Pitt is an argument one can make -- because he CAN look tall.
My hunch is still that he is around 5'10".
In terms of visual evidence it makes sense. He is always a good inch shorter than the likes of 5'11" Colm Meaney, or a smidge under Nicole Kidman. And then, of course, there is the best evidence we have, where he is barefoot with Gwyneth Paltrow and barely has her by an inch.
In terms of general observations, almost no celebrity on this site is given the 5'10" estimate. Most people prefer to err on the side of "support" by going for 5'10.5" - 5'11", or on the side of "damnation" by trying to make a case of 5'9" - 5'9.5".
As a man who is 5'10" inches myself, I can confirm that it is NOT a particularly good height. Even with the benefit of height-boosting shoes like Nike Shox, I struggle to look tall. I am *easily* beaten by people who are a genuine 5'11.25"+. I truly think that 5'11" is the threshold for "looking tall", and I curse the fact that I am just under it! :P
I don't agree with those who said Craig looked short in Casino Royale though. Perhaps in comparison to the previous Bonds (who were all 6'+), and tall co-stars didn't help (Simon Abakrian, Mads Mikkelsen, Eva Green etc). He just looked a very average height, which is exactly what 5'10" is. Beats some, gets beaten by others.
jason said on 28/Aug/08
he is without doubt 5'9 when he meets jolie for the first time in tombraider, full bodies shot of the two of em when she leaves the scene
mikec said on 26/Aug/08
this reminds me of steve mcqueen, he had the same build of him before he got all buff for james bond, most likely 5'10 or marginally under.
laredo said on 24/Aug/08
I agree with Matt. Connery's best Bond movie was From Russia with Love - - that I can watch over and over but besides that Casino Royale seems to be the next bestm film (only an opinion though) Craig must be atleast 5 10
Caesar said on 24/Aug/08
king kong says on 17/Aug/08
the guy just looks short in royale. a legit 5'10 wouldnt look short on screen, leading me to see 5 9 max for him barefoot
I thought he looked 5'11 in Casino Royale. 5'10 actually looks short on screen, generally, but average/tallish in real life. Practically all legitimate 5'10 guys on this site are downgraded by people en masse. Craig has the body and proportions of a thin solid 5'10 guy, like Guy Pearce or Gabriel Byrne.
Lmeister said on 20/Aug/08
I agree with you Paul 178cm. All the other Bonds have been kinda lame except Roger Moore, but his Bond movies are just camp humour. Gotta say that the "blond" Bonds are better.
Paul 178cm said on 19/Aug/08
This estimation of 178cm seems perfect for Daniel Craig, although 177cm or even 176 wouldn't amaze me. Fantastic body and proportions in Casino Royale, can't wait for Quantum of Solace. I hope they don't go the way of Batman the dark knight ( all action and stunts and no plot). Craigs Height and build brings a certain believability to the role of James Bond. No offence to the other Bond actors, but Craig doesn't have that attitude like he was born with a better pot to piss in.
Anonymous said on 18/Aug/08
my verdict, morning 5ft9.5 evening 5ft8.5 should be listed as 5ft9
king kong said on 17/Aug/08
the guy just looks short in royale. a legit 5'10 wouldnt look short on screen, leading me to see 5 9 max for him barefoot
blueeyedninja said on 16/Aug/08
there's a scene in Invasion where Craig and Kidman are running down the street. In the side view shot Craig is obviously wearing rather high heels (for a man)
Brad said on 12/Aug/08
5' 9.5". Glenn's 5' 11" figure is typical Glenn: inflate like a tire.
Leung said on 11/Aug/08
Fradiavalo said on 10/Aug/08
If Nicole Kidman is listed as 5ft 10.5 in then daniel is 5 ft 9.5 because in The Invasion he does look an inch and a half shorter than her in most of the scenes.I m guessin he is 5'9" at the most
said on 9/Aug/08
I think you should check out DC promoting Casino Royale back in 2006 on the Letterman show... when they shake hands, I see 4 inches min. between 6'2'' Letterman and Daniel. Check it out: Click Here
5'10'' is the maximum, but still -he is an interesting looking guy. Not necessarily attractive, but he has charisma
Mr. R said on 1/Aug/08
When he was chosen, Craig was listed at 5-11. However, any actor at 5-11 in Hollywood would surely claim 6 feet. Therefore, I believe Craig is between 5-9 and 5-10 and the producers knew that they could not get away with calling him 6 feet, because he is a few inches shorter than that.
Margherita said on 1/Aug/08
Oh ohhh last night Sylvia was on the telly. Daniel Craig is the same height as Gwyneth Paltrow in all the scenes where they re bare foot. There is a garden scene when he comes back from fishing thats the best example.
said on 31/Jul/08
This article references the same comments by Gemma Arterton. And, it is in English:Click Here
said on 28/Jul/08
Just Jared has pix of Craig at Tesco Maida Vale with thick shoes. In them shoes hes the same height as a 1.784m Land Rover. Without shoes 176cm? Do you live in england Rob???? You could take a photo of yourself in this same position in front of Tesco.Click Here
Margherita said on 28/Jul/08
A friend was reading this site with me last night. She and friends saw him from afar at the premiere of Flashbacks Of A Fool. Theres this young actor whose in the movie with him who is below average (5ft 7). Daniel Craig was a little taller than him but wearing Brad Pitt style custom dress shoes. So confusing really because I had him down as the same height as Jonny Lee Miller.
Aratirion said on 22/Jul/08
In the german speaking countries the news says she'd be 1.70m and he 1.77m. If she's wearing heels that make her 1.77 the most, and he dress shoes that make him about 1.80 how the hell could he look smaller then? I guess he wasn't smaller but should appear a lot taller than her (not just 2,3 cm).
Gonzalo said on 22/Jul/08
Turkish, I posted the same article you did, but mine is in Spaish. Sorry I didn
said on 22/Jul/08
Gemma Arterton (5ft7) made Craig look short ;) What kinda stilettos was she wearing, if she made Daniel look short??? Unless Daniel really isn't 5ft10. Even a 5ft9 guy is taller than 5ft10 in modern dress shoes and Gemma is 5ft7+3inch = tops 5ft10 in massive stilettos...
[Editor Rob: maybe she was wearing true near 4 inch heels...in theory though they'd be same height...]
dom said on 21/Jul/08
I do believe he is probably around 5'9 without shoes and probably is given lifts to boost him up to 10.5 or 11. The thing is he is very slight so therefore he looks taller on screen, i think its also how you film him from certain angles that make him look bigger. But truth be told it doesn't matter if he isn't 5'10 because he is the best bond since connery. I mean surely if you were six foot you might stick out as a target. Thing is he's just an average guy but a great actor, and the best thing to happen to the bond franchise since sliced bread.
Gonzalo said on 21/Jul/08
Interesting article. It
said on 21/Jul/08
Bond girl: 'Daniel Craig wore lifts'
Bond girl Gemma Arterton has revealed that Daniel Craig wore shoe lifts to appear taller in the new 007 movie Quantum Of Solace.
The actress, who stands at 5ft 7in, told the Mail On Sunday: "Daniel is 5ft 10in but when they put me in heels, I was taller than him and it didn't look good on screen.Click Here
Anonymous said on 20/Jul/08
the mail on sunday has just outed him in the uk as a lift wearer on the quantum set in order to appear taller than his co star in her heels
Anonymous said on 17/Jul/08
He barley looks 5'9, so i wouls say his real height is 5'8.5 to 5'9 and then his height is inflated to 5'11 for James Bond
glenn said on 24/Jun/08
he is around or near 5-11.leung is right.and so is trace.
Leung said on 24/Jun/08
MD said on 23/Jun/08
lol! @ 182 cm. Yeah, right.
Trace said on 23/Jun/08
I recently read he is 182cm tall and weights 78kg (172lbs)
Nowwhat... said on 15/Jun/08
Not really about the height as much as the weight before and after training
In high school @18 I was 135lbz. @37 I was 215lbz. currently @44 195
NYMedStudent said on 15/Jun/08
Anon2008, as was reported in the April 1, 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (JAAP), appropriate weight training programs have no effect on linear growth or growth plates. However, you should always maintain a level of skepticism when no clinical trials have demonstrated this conclusively. Nevertheless, please key in on appropriate. There is a height relationship to diet (calcium rich foods) and physical activity, such that physical activity will have a positive influence on height during spurts. That said, one's genetic make-up ultimately plays a greater role as a height determinant.
Exercise in the U.S. population is generally viewed as a way to aesthetically improve one's appearance. However, the health benefits of exercise should be emphasized for young people. Diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease has been linked to childhood obesity, which often carries over into adulthood. Rather than emphasizing a muscle bound appearance, as a society we must concern ourselves with these important health issues. Having seen these affects first hand in the clinic, I will tell you, you don't want to end up on a a downward spiral of something like heart disease; it's not just that these individual die at younger age, these disease decreasethe quality of life at early ages such as in one's 40s or 50s is greatly diminished.
Bottom line: MODERATION of food intake and plenty of age appropriate exercise.
Again, the AAP recommends: "Preadolescents and adolescents should avoid power lifting, body building, and maximal lifts until they reach physical and skeletal maturity."
Aimie said on 31/May/08
that sounds just right. He is about the same height as Nicole Kidman in the film "Invasion", even a bit shorter in scenes where she wears shoes.
jd said on 5/May/08
completely agree that he barely scrapes 5 10 in movies. I'd say a flat 5 10 if not a smidge under for this dude
Anon2008 said on 28/Apr/08
NYMedStudent, old post you made but I wanted to address what you said about weight lifting and height. I think this is supposed to be a myth and it doesn't stunt growth unless you were to injure your self in some sort of way. Plenty of guys have lifted weights in their teens growing up (Shaquille O'Neal, David
Robinson, Karl Malone, Michael Vick, Dave Draper, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lou Ferrigno etc.)
In fact I think when you lift weights in a healthy way it should help your growth, not harm it.
glenn said on 27/Apr/08
again read my post.this is dense.he was 5-11 without any aid.dress shoes dont give 2 inches first of all.
morning-6ft said on 26/Apr/08
ive been lifting weights since i was 14,oh no imagine all the height i must have lost,im loosing sleep over this,a ha i know ill join Melvins yoga classes and never lift weights again,problem solved!
GSP said on 26/Apr/08
"again.read my posts.he was 5-11 in dress shoes when i saw him."
I can hit scrape 5'11 in dress shoes and I am only 5'9. 5'8.5 on a bad day at neight.
glenn said on 26/Apr/08
again.read my posts.he was 5-11 in dress shoes when i saw him.
Christiano said on 25/Apr/08
Little concerned,I never said I did, I am just curios as to whether this possible or not. Personally I think there any many factors more important than height.
terry said on 25/Apr/08
he is around 5'9. My friend is his stunt and body double who is maximum 5'9. Definately doesnt seem taller than 5'10
anon said on 25/Apr/08
well the 6-foot reputation is to keep the james bond description.all previous bond's were over six foot and i believe ian fleming even described bond in one of his books as "6 foot" or something.
daniel craig is 5'10, but you would never hear him publicly announcing that,not until the next 5 years or so.regardless of that,craig is the best actor to have played bond in my opinion-only connery did better in from russia with love. if you also notice,he's avoided all sorts of barefoot pictures with people since he's become bond.
glenn said on 24/Apr/08
my friends say 6ft.i saw 5-11.yet in films he looks barely 5-10.
Marcelo C. said on 18/Apr/08
In "Tomb Raider", there
little concerned said on 13/Apr/08
Christiano, why would u want to stretch yourself to get taller?? You are 6 feet and a half that is a perfect height??
Christiano said on 26/Mar/08
He has a very good posture. Sorry for going slightly off topic but some people have mentioned stretches to make yourself taller, this intrigues me could someone give me some more information and maybe some links, would be much appreciated. By the way im 17 and 6' 0.5 and still growing I have lifted weights for the past year and I do not believe they decrease your height if you use correct technique.
Ray said on 26/Mar/08
Good point Matt about Connery. He has the best walk I've ever seen. I hear he had some special training before he made it big to help him move like that.
Jen said on 24/Feb/08
He's probably about 5"10/5"11, however he does look shorter than this because he's a lot more beefy now days, so he'll look shorter.
eve said on 22/Feb/08
Saw him a couple of years ago in London, stood next to him in a shop ; he's not much taller than me at 5'7". Perhaps 5'8" ? But looks somehow more imposing because of that special radiance that stars give off.
Tom said on 21/Feb/08
Thanks Matt. All i'm saying is that while his height (not even that short either!) seems to be an issue for the ian fleming's bond purists, it works cinematically. let's not forget that alot of those great action heroes weren't that tall either (steven mcqueen or charles bronson) but there was believability in their action movements. it seems that people who aren't very tall can really work with alot of space. i really mean it when i say to carefully observe pierce brosnan's running and action movements. it is pretty awkward. his fight scenes are pretty stiff, almost like how keanu reeves performs martial arts in matrix series. yet, you can still have tall people like sean connery perform convincingly well. i read a korean article that was about why martial arts worked more smoothly with asians rather than non-asians. height was the major factor.
Matt said on 21/Feb/08
Nicely put Tom, especially the part about Connery's graceful movement. If memory serves me correctly, there is an old anecdote that when Connery was a complete unknown auditioning for the role of Bond, one of the people present said "I like the way he moves. Like a panther." It was like a prowl with a little bounce in his step. I have never paid attention to the way people walk...but I could watch Connery walk all day long! ;)
Liam said on 20/Feb/08
Going off a scene in Casino Royale - where he's walking through a crowd in Venice - I can't see how he could be any taller than 5'10". He blends into the crowd like a spy should!
Tom said on 20/Feb/08
I think its to Daniel Craig's benefit that he is not AS TALL AS those bond actors. what do i mean? well, with the exception of sean connery, the 6ft and over bond actors were a bit stiff in their manuverability and action. did you observe how pierce brosnan fights and runs? daniel craig moves with more fluid and he is able to execute action sequences with more balance. you rarely see tall people performing convincing martial arts. sure, steven segal was like 6'5 but he did aikido and that involves more upper body movement than jump kicks. now, i say sean connery is an exception because while he was pretty tall, he moved pretty gracefully. he had background in weight-lifting (he was 3rd place mr universe) and football.
chris175 said on 17/Feb/08
never looks near 5-11 to me, id go with 5-9 and a lift abuser
H-G-H said on 16/Feb/08
Looks around the 5'10.5" mark, nothing less than 5'10" though.
Boxing Fighter said on 31/Jan/08
Very well writen Matt.
I also agree with 5ft10.
Matt said on 27/Jan/08
Chris, I think by that point Craig was just fed up with being questioned over his suitability for the role. I'm a big Bond fan and followed the whole process from the first day. The media (and new media) were saying he had the wrong colour hair, the wrong eyes, the wrong look, the wrong height, the wrong attitude, the wrong constitution etc. Craig actually said that he checked out that infamous CraigNotBond site when he was online one day, and it led to a "dark few days". So I think he started off quite taciturn, knowing that anything he said could incriminate him ("5'10"? WOW! WAAAAAAY too short! He said it himself! Short Bond! He should be over six foot!"), but gradually lightened up as he got increasingly accustomed to the whole publicity demands -- and as his credibility in the role started to shore up.
I mean, I don't think anybody here has argued that he is *lower* than 5'9". We've had a couple of people say he is 5'9" on the nose, many suggest he is 5'9.5", and most say he is 5'10". He is not like a Tom Cruise who has to make impossible gains. But he is around that 5'10" "golden height" mark whereby he can either dominate people, or gets dominated.
Chris said on 25/Jan/08
Why would somebody refuse to spread light on their height if they 6' or above? Or even 5'10...I know thats not the issue here but still. And surely the journalist quoted att he top of this page could have guessed his height, even if normal, normal-tall, normal-short.
TNTinCA said on 24/Jan/08
"i met craig 2 1/2 years ago and he seemed 5-11.had dress shoes on.jerkoff too"
I had heard that he was abrasive to some but a lot of that apparently was a chip on his shoulder from all the negativity regarding him being selected as James Bond. He actually even alludes to that in the Casino Royale DVD extra features. Then again, maybe he really is a jerk. :-)
TNTinCA said on 24/Jan/08
In my opinion, I don't believe Craig is less than 5'10" for the simple reason that I doubt they would have casted an actor that short to play James Bond. 5'10" at the absolute minimum, although I think he is somewhere nearer 5'11".
dmeyer said on 21/Jan/08
craig is 5'10 he looks close enaugh nicoles height can look 5'11 with small lifts and 5'9 with bad posture and converse
chris said on 21/Jan/08
standing next to nicole kidman he looked shorter than her,
nicole is 5'10.25,so he must be 5,9
dmeyer said on 13/Jan/08
he did look 5'9.5 max with hanks but hanks had thick heels like 1.5 and craigs had 0.6 so 2 cm disadvantage so 2 in differance
Johnny said on 12/Jan/08
I think Craig is a solid 5'11. Not shorter or taller. 5'10 is the lowest. He looked pretty tall in Casino Royale.
Star Fox said on 5/Jan/08
I met Craig when he was filming Casino Royale and to me he was very nice and caring. He's is one of the nicest people I've ever met. As for his height, he looked 5'10 to me.
Funn said on 29/Dec/07
Josua, I wonder how would you know for sure that "Craig wears elevator shoes all the time... Jackman IS 189, Craig about 178-179"??
Josua said on 29/Dec/07
Craig wears elevator shoes all the time... Jackman IS 189, Craig about 178-179.
Anonymous said on 25/Dec/07
After i've seen the pic with near to Hugh jackman , I don't think jackman is a 189 cm man ...or Craig is more than 1 78 cm!
5'9 said on 24/Dec/07
"I believe that Craig is 5'11". In Casino Royale, there is a scene in the casino where he is shaking hands with the villain, who is 5'11.75" and there is not much height difference between them and they are both wearing dress shoes."
Looked about 2 inches shorter if I remember correct. He was also at least an inch to 2 shorter than the villians spy (who claims hes in cia)..allthough cant see their whole profile in the close up.
I think hes between 5'8.5-5'10..somewhere in their fully compressed before bed height.
Viper652 said on 5/Oct/06
Looks 5-10 1/2 to 5-11 to me.
said on 4/Oct/06
he's 5'10" or 5'11", but definitely not scrawny as hell as someone said earlier. It was reported that he actually had to lose a bit because he was too muscular. See here(filming Casino Royale):Click Here
amy said on 28/Sep/06
I think Daniel Craig is so sexy. From his pictures with Nicole, I would have to say he's at least 6 feet tall.
Anonymous said on 25/Sep/06
anyone can add comments on wikipedia
Roadrunner said on 24/Sep/06
I was reading about Casino Royale and Daniel Craig on wikipedia a couple of weeks ago, it stated that he was 5'11", being the shortest bond but still taller than the us and uk average by 2 inches, and then i read about it today and they have changed it. They say Daniel Craig is only 5'10" and one inch taller than the average...i wonder what made them change their mind.
John R said on 14/Sep/06
You should check out the pics with Nicole Kidman. He does appear to be 6
Jon said on 9/Sep/06
I don't know anything about this guy, but i do know a friend I know through training, is now his 'official' stunt double (and now 'living it up'!!) and he is only about 5'9''
Tom said on 8/Sep/06
In Road to Perdition, Craig looks shorter than Hanks (5'11") by an inch or so, but there may have been a point to that. Honestly, I was very surprised when he was chosen to be bond--I thought 6'+ was a requirement.
anonymous2 said on 29/Aug/06
re MMKs pic, Paltrow is listed at 175cm but it's becoming clear she is more like 171cm. going from that pic Craig is likely about 177cm.
Viper652 said on 26/Aug/06
I dont think they would hire him as Bond If he was a wooden actor. If anything they would hire him on acting skills alone since he doesnt look your typical Bond.
Glenn said on 26/Aug/06
I agree that he is that tall.I just thought he was rude to me and should handle fans better.
said on 25/Aug/06
Here's a picture of him with Gwyneth Paltrow.Click Here
How tall is she? 5'8"??
Terry said on 25/Aug/06
He is actually 5'11.5" the exact same height as me. I have met him through acting and he is an incredibly nice guy. He just hates publicity and photos outside of his job, as would you guys if you had to put up with some of the things he has. He's not wooden at all I think he's a superb actor and he is renowned throughout the acting community in the UK.
bob said on 15/Aug/06
he is around 5'9 or less without his lifts. He is a horrbily wooden actor with the chrisma of a wooden post and as far as Eva Green goes she is just ...... who needs to change the way she treats bond fans. I am currently working on my second movie and screwups like this make me sick. I would have rather seen Eric Bana, Clive Owen, Collin Farrel or even Ben Affleck playing Bond before this no talented troll was given a shot at the role.
Anonymous said on 11/Aug/06
No way. Look at his pics with Steven Spielberg (who's 2 inches shorter than Mel Bibson). Danial Craig is 5'9".
dmeyer said on 31/Jul/06
nicole has only 3 to 4 cm heels in those shoes so about 6 feet in it so craig does look a solid 5 11 in those pics
said on 31/Jul/06
From photos he looks 5'9 or so. Here is a link to some photos of him on a set with Nicole Kidman (here listed at 5'10). He looks a bit taller than her in this series (lifts?): Click Here
Glenn said on 21/Jul/06
Gave me a really hard time for the photo OP,and when he did pose with me,his friend,security or whoever he was cut the 2 of us out of the photo when I developed it.thats low.
Ed said on 20/Jul/06
Glenn, what did Craig do to make him an a**hole?
Glenn said on 19/Jul/06
I met him.5-11 and an a**hole.
Ed said on 18/Jul/06
Hard guy to pinpoint, in Munich he looked this height, in Tomb Raider maybe a little shorter, in Road to Perdition shorter, and in Layer Cake 5ft11 sounds about right, maybe more like 5ft10.5. Even if he's 5ft9 he's still a great actor and will make a cool Bond, bringing some grit to the role, unlike Remington Steele.
Alexander-Serbia said on 30/May/06
Ooouu Daniel craig is so small..I was standing near to him on one party in east London..and he was about a
said on 24/May/06
The new JAMES BOND 007, 5'11" Daniel Craig packs a big gun...(is it still a Walter PPK?)...looks like a 9mm H&K auto...Click Here
"Honey, have you been through Stallones' closet again?"Click Here
Now THATS a Walter...Click Here
Bond always gets THE GIRL....(Lucky!!!)Click Here
This was how IAN FLEMING envisioned Jimbo to be...Click Here
Paul said on 21/May/06
Sorry guys but they are billing him at 5'11 because that is the most they can get away with. They couldn't say 6'0. I think he is 1.79m a shade over 5'10.
tomking said on 13/May/06
He is well trained with a good body,respect.He seems also to be not a nice guy, like Glenn said.But we must give him a chance.In gmx.net his height is 182cm and 78kg.
Ed said on 5/May/06
Concur, he may not look good, he may be a bit short. But the look in his eyes screams Bond.
The Horse of FUNK said on 3/May/06
"[Editor Rob: could have been a lot worse in the past...Sid James coulda been the first Bond...]"
Just imagine Mel Gibson. Yes, he was in the works until they got Brosnan. Not that a guy like Mel, being 5'10, would have any problem... It'd just be hard watching William Wallace, Mad Max, and Martin Riggs running around in a tux.
Oh! Has anyone seen the CR trailer yet? It actually looks very good. I think this guy's going to be a great Bond.
Elio said on 3/May/06
Saw him a quirky low budget British romantic comedy drama. Definately looked 5'11" in that, for what it's worth.
MD said on 3/May/06
What is this build that people keep speaking of? Only very recently has he bulked up. Otherwise, his regular build (thin/skinny) would make him look taller than he really is, not shorter.
dmeyer said on 3/May/06
he might be 5'11 but because of his build he looks 5'9"
Glenn said on 1/May/06
He is 5-11.
Ed said on 30/Apr/06
I think Craig's height is about right, he just looks shorter because he's built.
Brett, dude, chill out. Stop being so uptight about the physical aspects of Bond. The producers were looking for the Bond attitude.
And oh, get a girlfriend, man.
[Editor Rob: could have been a lot worse in the past...Sid James coulda been the first Bond...]
J.J.F said on 25/Apr/06
This guy scratches 5'11', he's probably 1m79.
I'm curious though as to why American's cannot pronounce his name, it's 'Craig'[kraygh] with a guttoral 'guh' - not 'Creg' as in 'keg'. Nitwits.
said on 31/Mar/06
Look at this picture, Craig is the closest to the camera and looks the same height as Paul Newman.Click Here
Brett said on 27/Mar/06
I dont think hes petite, I mean hes a slim build, but he carrys a good deal of lean muscle on him, hed win the inaugral bond Bench pressing competition if there was one.
Mr. R said on 24/Mar/06
In this weeks' Entertainment Weekly, Craig is decribed as "not being petite at 5'11" in response to the criticisms of his being the wrong choice for Bond.
Brett said on 23/Mar/06
I dont think any single bond has ever looked tough? seriously? they are meant to be suave, tall dark and handsome, and use their brain over their brawn. After all all Bonds were meant to be 6'2" and 170lbs, thats on the lean side of things. Id rather Craig take the role of bond, then a muscled up bald guy like Vin Diesel. I assume Funkmonk does not have 'girlfriends', or speak to the opposite sex, because if you ask a women, what they think about Brosnan, Connery ( in his day), and compare it to the likes of Daniel Craig, they will laugh at you, trust me. Seriously there is no chance Craig will be the sexiest man alive, that is one contest ugly people cannot win, hence its name. Craig may have some 'charm' if youd call it that, but thats it, every person who speaks to me about Craig , says how unattractive he is for a bond. According to FunkMonks brilliant theorem 'films success being in proportion to the lead actors chance of getting into the sexiest man alive competition', well how about this years Oscar winner, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Im sure hes right at the top of the list, with his stable table belly, manboobs and a jawline as chiseled as a krispy Kreme, hes surely going to win this too. Get Real!
MD said on 18/Mar/06
dmeyer, just so you know in the future, ANYONE can submit heights to IMDb, which is why it is an extremely unreliable source. You could actually go in right now, and submit a new height, and as long as it wasn't too unbelievable, you could probably get it approved.
J.J.F said on 17/Mar/06
Erm, Brett, settle down old chap. Surely I'm entilted to my own opinion about Moore and Brosnan's portrayal of Bond? Moore was a tedious bond imo and Brosnan just never convinced me he could hurt so much as a house-fly.
Their heights masy be up for debate, but surely you are not going to call Pierce 'tough'??
funkmonk said on 17/Mar/06
Brett, give the new Bond a couple of years, once he becoms more famous he will also top the 'sexist man alive' charts. It is mainly due to the amount of money a film makes that determines whether its lead acter is 'the sexist man' or whatever rather than the man's actually looks. Money rules the media.
Brett said on 13/Mar/06
J.J.F I think you live in a Dream land, everyone whoes seen him next to Brosnan and Connery claim hes like 3 inches shorter then either of them, claiming this clearly shows you have no idea. Moores acting inadequacies? hes still a classic bond. Brosnans wimpish looks? do you feel that inadequate to say such stupid comments? what next? perhaps George Clooney and Brad pitt are the ugliest men alive? Considering you have seen 0 celebs, wheres all this random info comming from?
dmeyer said on 11/Mar/06
thanks rob i think 180 is more realistic since he dosnt pretend to be more on imdb
J.J.F said on 10/Mar/06
versinty.... hmmm, might try that in scrabble next time.
Craig is 1.81m at best, though more like 1.79m. Anyhow, only one inch shorter than Brosso and a whole lot more buff to boot.
Craig's height may not be ideal, but then neither was Moore's acting or Brosnan's wimpish appearance. Quite frankly, there are slugs amoungst my home grown cucumbers that I find more menacing than Pierce.
I'm sure the Bond franchise will survive a 5'11" actor playing the part as long as he can actually ACT the part. And I thing D Craig probably can...
dmeyer said on 10/Mar/06
at best 5'11
dmeyer said on 10/Mar/06
at best 5ft 11
craig is almost as big as meany he might close to 5'11 but not over i dont get whi you say 181 when i doubt if h is 5'11 since he is smaller than meany and 3 inches smaller than hanks and aleast 4 inches smaller than bana
[Editor Rob: I never got round to changing that mention, but yes I've now seen most of this guys films 180cm looks right]
said on 10/Mar/06
Funkmonk, Both Connery and Brosnan have been in the top 10 of " the sexiest men alive" of their time, infact I do believe one year, Connery as voted the sexiest man alive. Man you should get in there with your friend! she must be easy to please, and as for him being the best looking bond, pfffft he is the ugliest by far, why do you think all those sites like Click Here
exist, and so many people want to boycott Casino Royale. Your friend is one in a million thats for sure, Id be interested to see a petition of people who believe Craig to be the 'best looking bond so far' , it would be a very very short list. But seeing we are getting side tracked here, and this site is about Craigs height, it seems that 90 percent of people do agree that Craigs height is in the versinty of 180cm.
said on 9/Mar/06
He has always looked average height at most outside of his movies. But man, has he put on a lot of muscle for this new Bond role:
1. Click Here
He looks to be 180-190 here, probably a good 20-30lbs than what he usually weighs, I'd guess.
funkmonk said on 9/Mar/06
to Brett: A friend of mine says that Daniel Craig is the best looking bond so far. Which is not hard, she says, as the rest are ugly!
Mr X said on 8/Mar/06
Daniel Craig's height shouldn't be the issue here. He's obviously close enough to pass for 6ft+ with the aid of a shorter supporting cast and contrary to some reports here he has a very muscular physique. My issue is that he's BLONDE!
But yeah, he'd be lucky to be 5'11 from what I've seen here...
Brett said on 8/Mar/06
J-Dog, you are obviously not around very many females, as every single one of my female friends, my girlfriend, and work collegues has mentioned Daniel Craig being really unattractive, scary looking, or remeniscent of an ex boxer whoes taken more then his fair share of blows to the head. J-Dog I think you should be questioning what you look like in the mirror, if you are suggesting that the guy isnt ugly. I am a huge bond fan, and it would take more then Daniel Craig to stop that, as I know he is a great actor, and the quality of his performance will be top notch, and most males go to a Bond film, for the action and the fact that it is a " Bond Film", but girls on the other hand, they enjoy "perve value" of a Bond Film, just like guys would if they happened to go to a charlies angels film. To my suprise, women seem to love Pierce Brosnans looks, despite his age, 95% of women think he is "all that", Craig, I have yet to hear one girl say anything positive about in the looks department, and unless you look like Rowan Atkinson, there are not many guys who are going to be outshown Visually by him.
Bond has an image of the ultimate "player" mixed with the ultimate secret agent, with acess to the worlds finest toys and females, an image most guys would love to have, and definitely this image is what draws the male audience, lets hope this image is still intact after Casino Royale.
zenski said on 1/Mar/06
181 cm and 183 cm.2cm diferent is nothing not even visible.
cendrin rovini said on 1/Mar/06
...when the bond in the books is 183 cm, why is daniel craig too small for bond, it makes me laugh... danny devito maybe a bad bond, but 3 cm, come on... give the guy a chance first, maybe hes the best bond ever after all...
Mario said on 1/Mar/06
The James Bond of the books is 6 ft as Ian Fleming stated. Dr No is 6 ft 6 and Blofeld was 6 ft 4 I believe. The James Bond of the movie's is 6 ft 2 as EON stated.
I think that Craig looks 5 ft 11 next Bana.
Anonymous said on 1/Mar/06
i just dont get whi he looks so short near ton hanks in road to perdition hanks looks 3" taller so either craig is 5'9.5 or tom hanks is wearing lifts and also were do you get 181 when he strugels to look 180
J-Dog. said on 28/Feb/06
"They trying to kill off the female audience ?"
I think they only thing they are killing off is the closeted male audience, who are more obsessed with James Bond's preceived "supposed" looks than any female could ever care. Hint, prominence take precendence for most women anyhow, and I hadn't known women were huge Bond fans.
I don't think anyone can really say much until the film is released, nor do I see the huge deal of having Daniel Craig as Bond..."OH GOD HE IS BLONDE OH MY GOD!" Hahaha. Looks 5'11"-6' next to Eric Bana. As said you guys are judging the whole performance an actor can delivery simply on predefined certain looks, yes that comes into factor as most people can rarely see beyond that. If there is a movie about such and such, this actor of the exact fitting height, weight, race, facial construct, eye color, et cetera must play it no matter what. Which adds to blandness of many films. Many here seem to complain when women care about looks or a person's height, but its men who hold much obsession with height, penis size and the list goes on.
Not sure how anyone can call him "ugly" either, he's not? How are you looking in your own mirror?
007 is a Franchise, not Santa Clause, it changes and yes it can be fickel just as one's perceptions.
Desky said on 26/Feb/06
Actually, in the book 'Dr No' James Bond is described as being 5 feet 10 inches tall. When he first encounters Dr No he describes him as 'unusually tall at 'around six feet'.
Mario said on 26/Feb/06
He is not short, but compared to the others Bond's he is short.
Of course they can make him look taller, but "WE" know that he is much shorter than the others.
trueheight said on 24/Feb/06
he's not short, thats just absurd
Kumiko said on 24/Feb/06
I think he's pretty proportionate for 5' 8". And he's cute enough if he has dark hair. They wanted a grittier, military style James Bond. It's not realistic to have him so tall anyway. Besides, nobody will be able to tell how tall he is on the big screen--nobody has complained about 5 and a half feet before. It's only now that he plays Bond and all Brosnan's fans play the height card because Pierce really is the height he says he is. So yeah, he's a tiny man, but no it doesn't matter at all. If he's a good actor he can do it. That's the bottom line.
wasa said on 24/Feb/06
from the website craignotbond.com: "How can a short, blond actor with the rough face of a professional boxer and a penchant for playing killers, cranks, cads and gigolos pull off the role of a tall, dark, handsome and suave secret agent?"
thats just hollywood heightism at it's worst. i mean all previos bond actors where 6'2 or more, that's atleast 2 inches above what Bond was supposed to be. Then why is it impossible that a 5'10 actor can play the part, 2 inches beneath Fleming's description of Bond.
Tom said on 24/Feb/06
Aron's thing seems to be right. See in this picture where the light switch is about chest high.
The guy behind him might be standing on the lower step so they look more even.
In the end though, they can do anything in the movies. Just like they did with LOTR. So in Bond they can make him look just the right height. He might be closer to 66" than 60" though imho. But he might do okay otherwise, so why not give him a break.
Taylor said on 23/Feb/06
I worked as a day player on the as-yet-unreleased "Every Word is True" which is "the other Truman Capote movie" with Sandra Bullock. I spent the afternoon pushing Daniel Craig (he played one of two defendants) up the courthouse steps. I can attest that I stood taller than him and I was NOT wearing tall boots and I am 5'10 1/2". Still, what really matters in film is if you can act. He can ACT...brilliantly. I just hope that all the brainwashed masses can realize that we have been fed "tall, dark and handsome" forever by Hollywood. But then again, how many blond men are are fully Jewish? Blond guys are portrayed as bad or ignorant in movies. Hmmm...wonder why? Jude Law isn't really very blond. McConaughey lightens his hair too. Redford was natural though. I guess Teutonic people will eventually be O.K.
Gotxo said on 22/Feb/06
Lol Aaron, with 146cm he would make an excelent nick-nack (the dwarf of the TMWTGG) ;)
Aaron Martyr said on 22/Feb/06
I used Photoshop to layer several stills of DC that also feature objects (soda can, height of doornob, Aston Martin spec. measurements, etc.) to conclusively prove his actual height (in dress shoes). Comparing to other actors is not reliable because they also may fudge stats for PR purposes, and most soundstages are built to accomodate shooting scenes with actors of different heights. The end result proved him to between 141 and 146 centimeters, which is around 60 inches tall. Since this methodology is repeatable with any given set of pictures , it conclusively proves Daniel Craig's height to be very close to 144.28 centimeters. Anyone who argues this without carefully conducting their own documented battery of measurements against real-world objects would just be foisting their own preconceived notions on the rest of us. Besides, he is obviously short, and just looking at any full length picture reinforces the absolute fact that Daniel Craig is 141-146 centimeters tall. I did this testing because he is one of my favorite actors, and I'm sick of seeing him represented as being something he's not. He will make an excellent bond. His height of 144 centimeters in now way impacts his incredible acting ability or charisma.
wasa said on 20/Feb/06
I saw Layer Cake a few days ago and he did seem to look more like 5'10-5'10.5. But he might have looked tinier because he seemed to be surrounded by bigger guys like 6"2 George Harris. Still he seemed to be shorter than 5'11 Colm Meaney, also his shoulder width seemed to be a lot smaller then Colm, more like a 5'7-5'9 guy.
Brett said on 16/Feb/06
Craig is a good actor, but I mean hes not great looking, hes blonde, it doesnt really bother me that hes shorter then the others though, and he just isnt what we would associate with James Bond. I personally thing Hugh Jackman could have made a great bond, I think Chris Bale would be a great bond, I mean hes goodlooking,has the accent already, hes very slick in a suit, and he can play a narcissitic metrosexual role well, so why on earth did they choose Craig? They trying to kill off the female audience ?
wasa said on 15/Feb/06
i saw munich yesterday and I got to admit I was pleasantly surprised by Craig's performance. He's definitely not short, he was shorter then Bana who is obviously very tall, but he didn't seem like a small guy. More importantly, the guy has charisma and is pretty well built, and without trying to sound gay, he's got the bluest eyes i've ever seen in a man. ;) He's handsome in a rough way, so i think he does fit the bond description. Very nice english accent aswell. So give the guy some credit, although I'm a big fan of Brosnan (it's a shame the Bond movies after GoldenEye were suckin' in storyline) I think he could do well. And what does height have to do with the fact that he's gonna portray a good Bond or not, I think you guys often seem to judge the value of the performance of an actor based on his height.
Damon said on 2/Feb/06
I don't know how long this image will last. But he certainly looks around 6foot there. And he's definitely pretty built. I'd say he'll make a great Bond, although a bit grittier than previous ones. I'm perfectly fine with that.
Anonymous said on 29/Jan/06
even that on ocassions craig dont look as tall as this but in munich he does look close to 5'11 near 6'3" bana and geofrey rush apeared closer to bana's height than craig did rush can be 6 feet
JJE said on 28/Jan/06
If anyone has ever read any of the books, Bond's description is that he is 6 ft 1, and has athletic build. Also, according to the books, he's supposed to be "handsome" but rather "hard corps" looking, due to some of the torture that he suffers in the earlier books. He definitely didn't have blond hair though.
J.J.F said on 23/Jan/06
If i had to have a guess I'd say 1.79m ... A little on the short side for 007, non?
Mario said on 18/Jan/06
Terence Young (The director of the first two) said that Bond should be played by a guy who is at least 6 ft 2 tall.
Guy Hamilton (director of four Bond's) said that Bond should be played by a guy who is at least 6 foot tall, he considered Burt Reynold back then who was according to Hamilton 6 foot tall.
Maybe some lifts can help Craig to come to the other "6 ft 2+" Bond's.
Viper652 said on 18/Jan/06
Im still pretty surprised that they picked a Bond under 6-0. I thought it was Mandatory that every Bond has to be 6-0 or taller?
Glenn said on 17/Jan/06
I ran into craig and he is 5-11.photo was ruined by his assistant on purpose.craig,you suck and dont know how to treat fans.brosnan is 6-1 tops.
dmeyer said on 17/Jan/06
if tom hanks is not wearing lift in that pic then craig is no even 5'10 so rob wath proof do you got that craig is 5'11 show me some pics
[Editor Rob: I'm sure he's in trainers if I recall, they may be all worn-out thin-soled, but remember one guy who interviewed him had estimated he was 5ft 10.5. In layer cake he looked 5ft 11 based on the other heights from the guys, but lifts???]
Jason said on 17/Jan/06
Brosnan was big enough. Bit on the slim side, but he's tall and has a decent frame on him. Which IMO makes for a Better Bond prototype than shorter with a bit more muscle.
funkmonk said on 17/Jan/06
A pic of Brosnan and Craig. About a 2 inch advantage to Brosnan. http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/images/daniel_craig_1.jpg
J.J.F said on 17/Jan/06
Mike, do us a favor mate and check your facts before such feats of disinformation:
"...and his Munich co-star Eric Bana was also strongly considered for the 007 role"
Untrue - Bana was vaguely 'mentioned' in connection to the role but said early on he didnt want it.
"Brosnan is much taller and has a bigger build than Craig"
Debatable whether he really is THAT much taller than Craig - but a BIGGER BUILD?? Craig (see: Layer cake) has more muscle on him (that is not to say he is particularly 'big') than Brosnan ever had. Anyone who honestly thinks Brosnan is well built or muscular really should get to the gym more often :)
As for Daniel Craig's height - I'd agree he is a tad too short for the iconic role - but rather a decent actor who is only 5'10-5'11, than a smug TV actor who detracts 2 years off his age and adds them in inches to his 'frame'...
Brett said on 17/Jan/06
Mike do you think Brosnan is 6'2"? because everyone on the brosnan page want to bring him down to 6'0". Both Me and Glenn have met Brosnan, I thought he was around 6'2" ( Im 6'1") and Glenn pegged him at 6'0" , I was interested to see what you say on the matter.
Mario said on 14/Jan/06
Bond was in the 60s played by Connery and Lazenby who where 6 ft 2.5. And when they looked for a new Bond in the late 60s they looked for a men between 6 ft 1 to 6 ft 4. A 6 ft 2.5 guy in the 60s is the same as a 6 ft 4.5 today.
Mike said on 13/Jan/06
Here's a link with Daniel Craig standing next to Nicole Kidman:
Mike said on 13/Jan/06
Of course, Connery and Moore won't badmouth Craig, but honestly from seeing him in a few other movies, Daniel Craig just doesn't have that Alpha male persona that is necessary to make a good Bond. I thought even Timothy Dalton was a better fit, even though he didn't do well in the box office as 007. Hugh Jackman would have been perfect to play 007, a lot of people chose him as their favorite candidate when it was discovered that Brosnan was leaving the role. Clive Owen was the number two choice, also better than Craig an taller at 6'2".
Tubbs said on 12/Jan/06
I agree Mike about him not lasting too long, Craig is a good actor, but he doesn't seem to fit the description. I've heard he's only contracted for one movie, so you never know, there could be a return for Brosnan. However, Connery and Moore seem to think he'll be pretty good, but having said that, they aren't gonna say he's gonna be crap. Any ideas when the picture of Glenn with Craig is available? Saw a picture of him in Our Friends in the North next to the 6ft Eccleston, looks now more than 5'11 next ot him, maybe a shade under that mark.
Mike said on 11/Jan/06
Regardless, I don't think Craig will last very long in the Bond role. Timothy Dalton was the 007 that adhered most closely to the novel, and he wasn't that popular. The overall reaction to Craig as 007 has been underwhelming, I saw a photo of Craig standing next to his predecessor, Pierce Brosnan, Brosnan is much taller and has a bigger build than Craig. If they had to replace Brosnan, Jackman should have gotten the role.
Tubbs said on 11/Jan/06
Craig isn't going to be the shortest Bond you know, Peter Sellars at about 5'8.5 was James Bond in Casino Royale, and is therefore the shortest man to have played Bond.
Mike said on 10/Jan/06
Bond is not supposed to be 7' tall, but he is supposed to be a large man, several other actors were considered for the role who are taller than Craig. Hugh Jackman was the front runner, he stands 6'3", and his Munich co-star Eric Bana was also strongly considered for the 007 role, Bana is the same height as Jackman.
dmeyer said on 10/Jan/06
if he is 5'11 i dont get whi he looks 3 " shorter than hanks
Eddd said on 9/Jan/06
Brosnan wanted to leave the role. Craig is 5'11. And though he's the shortest Bond, it doesn't meant at all that 5'11 is too short to be a Bond.
You expect just because it's Bond, he'd be 7'? Why not get Yao Ming to be the next Bond?
CelebHeights Editor said on 6/Jan/06
From GQ magazine a few years back (Sylvia), "They did a good job of making us seem similar in height, but you can tell he's not 6ft 4in" - Gwyneth Paltrow.
Mike said on 30/Dec/05
Daniel Craig is 5'11" and that is it, making him the shortest 007, Pierce Brosnan, Sean Connery, and Timothy Dalton stood at 6'2". I honestly don't know why they replaced Brosnan, he was the best 007 after Sean Connery.
Glenn said on 30/Dec/05
saw him too last week in new yorkI dont agree with built.when I develope my photo with him Ill scan it in.he is 5-11.
Anonymous said on 29/Dec/05
Jude Law is NOT 5'11". He is way too short for that. 5'9".
sexysadie said on 22/Dec/05
just saw him in the flesh... yep, he's about 6 ft tall and BUILT!
Picture said on 20/Dec/05
Craig has a bad posture in that picture but I say 3 inches wich makes Craig 5 ft 10.
Monty said on 19/Dec/05
How much of a difference is in this pic? I would say about 2-3 inches.
Britpop said on 15/Dec/05
I'm not convinced he's over 5'8". Show me a pic where he could even be 5'10". This guys as little as tiny Jude Law.
Tubbs said on 8/Dec/05
Maybe Craig at 5'11" isn't too short for Bond, as the British secret service have 5'11" as maximum height for field operation agents, so as not to stand out, and to 'blend into the background', not sure about the blonde hair though, d'ya reckon they'll dye it?
dmeyer said on 5/Dec/05
rob ithink he is shorter than 5'11 i saw road to perdition he looks around 2.5" shorter than hanks who is 184 is body doesnt look long
dmeyer said on 3/Dec/05
rob i would like to see a pic were craig look 5'11 because i am not convinced
[Editor Rob: you think he's taller??? or shorter?]
Anonymous said on 23/Nov/05
i met hanks he is 184 cm at best so is at best 177 cm
Brett said on 23/Nov/05
yes woopee lets claim hes 5'2", Kiera Knightly is not 5'4" thats garbage, she is meant to be a tall actress, have you seen bend it like beckham, she was taller then all the female actresses basically, and not far from the soccer coachs height, so good one Madeline, better luck next time
Madeline said on 20/Nov/05
Just went to a premier screening of Pride and Prejudice. Keira was very short. I would say 5'4".
Brett said on 20/Nov/05
Anonymous Kiera Knightly is atleast 5'7" so if she had near 4 inch heels on shed be around 5'11", so if hes taller then her hes atleast 5'11".
Anonymous said on 8/Nov/05
Brett said on 6/Nov/05
Then he must wear lifts, but he looks so damn lanky in Layer cake, so I still dont think hes less then 5'11"
CelebHeights Editor said on 2/Nov/05
An email from somebody:
"In Selfridges last year (in the fragrances dept...) I passed Daniel Craig.
I'm 5'11''and he can be no more than 5' 9" and quite slight. Some clever
Bond filming is need3ed"
Anonymous said on 1/Nov/05
Here he is next to 5'4" Knightly in 3-4" inch heels. He is clearly under 5'10".
Anonymous said on 1/Nov/05
I think it's pretty easy to tell he is really only 5'9" or 10"
Mario Nariano said on 1/Nov/05
Tottaly agree with you brett there no way that he is under 5 ft 11 (still too short for Bond)
There are some rumours that John Cleese (6 ft 5) and Colin Salmon (6 ft 4)were fired of Casino Royale (the new Bond movie) because they would make look Daniel Craig look like a midget. There are also rumours that EON want that Vesper Lind (the bond girl ;) is gonna be played by a lady between 5 ft 3 and 5 ft 6. Short Bond, Short ladies.
Brett said on 24/Oct/05
I cannot believe these people who come on here and claim dalton and brosnan are like 5'11", you have clearly not met these men, I can stand for brosnan as having met him, that he is easily in the 6'2" mark, and he probably wears chunky shoes quite often making him look even taller. After seeing that photo with brosnan i would comfortably say that daniel craig is 5'11" atleast. If anyone has seen layer cake they would have noticed how lanky and thin the guy is, from that alone you would think he was over 6ft, although I dont think this is the case. So I definitely agree, atleast 5'11" as from that pic with paltrow he looks around 2 - 2.5 inches taller then her, you can tell by his shoulder level being noticably higher then hers despite the camera angle being in his favour it is still obvious. shes 5'9.5" or so, making him atleast 5'11"
Anonmoose said on 24/Oct/05
In the Wired section
10/15/2005 2:54 PM
Columbia's Amy Pascal's claim in Sharon Waxman's N.Y. Times piece (10.15) that Daniel Craig, the new 007, "is the same size as Sean Connery" is hooey. I'm not calling Craig a shrimp, but he's a good two inches shorter than me. I'm 6 foot 1/2 inch, and I'd say he's about 5 foot ten and a half inches, give or take...maybe 5' 11". (I stood next to him after we did a Layer Cake interview in Park City last Janaury during the Sundance Film Festival.) And I've stood next to Connery, and he's at least 6'1" or 6'2". The website www.celebheights.com says he's 6 foot and 1 and 1/2 inches. The site has Craig at 5'11".
10/14/2005 8:11 AM
It's official: Daniel Craig is the new James Bond. The first blonde 007, and...the shortest. Sorry but I had to throw that in. I've stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Connery, Moore, Brosnan and Craig and I know whereof I speak.
Anonmoose said on 23/Oct/05
Gwyneth Paltrow is listed here as 5ft 9.75in. The problem is he's closer to the camera and the sand isn't level and she's bending back a bit. But he doesn't look like he's 5'9 and almost an inch shorter than her even with those factors. So I'd say he's minimum 5'10 and at an absolute stretch 5'11 but probably more like 5'10 1/2. That would also fit with his photos next to Brosnan and Hanks (who was said is wearing shoes in that photo while Craig wears sneakers) where he looks at least 3 inches shorter than both.
Evaristo said on 23/Oct/05
Yao is 7-7 said on 22/Oct/05
that iamge pretty much proves Craig is about 5-9
Ron this is one of the biggest joke height listings at 5-11 on this entire site.
Mario Nariano said on 19/Oct/05
If Dalton wores two inch lifts why does he look 6 ft 2, he should look 6 ft 1 in that case. And brosnan always looked 6 ft 1 to 6 ft 2, even before Goldeneye.
J.J.F said on 18/Oct/05
Sorry but Dalton wore lifts for most of his career and Brosnan did from Goldeneye onwards, that is a fact confirmed by their former agents.
Dalton is 6' and wore 2" lifts, Brosnan is 5'11" and wears 2" lifts. So no prob with 'upping' Daniel Craig to 6'1" with a bit of shoe-magic...
Mario Nariano said on 18/Oct/05
Of course they aren't going too say: Well he is pretty short, three inches shorter than the other bond's.
talker said on 18/Oct/05
in the photo with brosnan he looks at least 3inches shorter like Anonmoose correctly says.I believe Brosnan is about 6'1",so the guy must be 5'10" at best,no way he is even 5'11".
CelebHeights Editor said on 17/Oct/05
Sony Chief Executive quoted in the NyTimes: "Ms. Pascal said fans would have to wait to see the movie before judging Mr. Craig. As for the online criticism, she observed: "Well, he is tall. He's the same size as Sean Connery."
I think that meant to read: "he's the same size as sean connery when he's in 3-inch lifts"
JUSTMATT said on 17/Oct/05
As a Bond fan I think he will be the worst Bond...also because of his short height! James Bond couldn't be only 5.11!!
[Editor Rob: but it will be a rare thing for him to be reported as 181cm...it will be 6ft, 6ft 1...hey, I even expect bond fans on one site to somehow get him up to '6ft 3' Wyclef Jean!]
JUSTMATT said on 16/Oct/05
For sure now that he becomes James Bond his height will magically grow up!
talker said on 16/Oct/05
Craig looks short.I remember when i saw this guy in tombraider and i had never seen him before,i was puzzled why they would star aguy so short next to Angelina.He looks barely taller than her and is obviously physically small,unlike other short actors.
I think he must be around 5'9"at the most.
As far as being bond,if they want to throw their money away.......
Anonymous said on 16/Oct/05
That pic with daniel Craig and Hanks is iffy, hanks head is huge, meaning his closer to the camera, and I think it is more an optical illusion that hanks appears bigger then the others, certainly by that much atleast. plus you cant see their feet
Anonymous said on 16/Oct/05
Well atleast that pic with him and brosnan will shut the some people up who claim pierce is struggling with 6ft, mr Anonmoose reckons brosnan is 3inches taller then craig (if he actually stood up straight). But Mr J.J.F whoes clearly never met either dalton or brosnan ( and probably has a height complex) claims they are struggling with 6ft and need huge lifts to make themselves appear domineering for the role of bond.
Mario Nariano said on 15/Oct/05
Ian Flemming's bond was 6 ft tall, not 5 ft 11. So graig is one inch too short, but the other bond's are two inches too tall!
Anonmoose said on 15/Oct/05
No posts here before he was Bond and now there will be a ton. Funny.
Fleming stated Bond was 6 ft which was considered taller back in 1952 than it is now.
Craig with Brosnan at the GQ Awards in Sept 2005
Brosnan is leaning and is still at least a couple inches taller. Craig is minimum 3 inches shorter than Brosnan.
Issheuhboy said on 13/Oct/05
Height doesn't matter for Bond, he's either standing up in a suit, laying down on a bed (either with a girl, or poised, ready to shoot some guy), or punching some henchman out of a car in a volcano/undersea lab. They could get a 5'2 actor to do that and you wouldn't be able to tell...
Mario Nariano said on 13/Oct/05
Dalton and Brosnan didn't wore lifts, come with better arguments when you want too downgrade a celeb. Anaway this guy is too short for bond.
I'm surprised that they fired Ewan Mccregor because he was too short and this guy is marginally taller than Mccregor.
J.J.F said on 13/Oct/05
He's not over 5'11" - but nothing that a pair of well polished elevator shoes can't fix. Dalton and Brosnan used them too, so no problem.
Anonymous said on 13/Oct/05
hes the new james bond, and he surely doesnt fit the role, hes like 3 inches too short, has light hair instead of black, and is scrawny as hell
Issheuhboy said on 12/Oct/05
Taller bonds? But all the Bonds have been at least 6'1!
Wonder said on 12/Oct/05
The new Bond. Imdb says 6.0, but this says something else: http://www.imdb.com/gallery/granitz/1515/Events/1515/DanielCrai_Vespa_590889_400.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Craig,%20Daniel%20(I)
[Editor Rob: would you believe there's an article on the net describing Craig as being 6ft 1 ;)
No kidding, it's on SFGAte.com,
""You don't read for the part," says Craig, who, at 6 foot 1, would be one of the taller Bonds"]