Daniel Radcliffe's Height
5ft 4 ½ (163.8 cm)
English actor best known for starring in the Harry Potter series of films. He has also appeared in Woman in Black and Horns. He stated in 2005 he was was 5ft 5.5 (that half inch being important!) and in 2007 he claimed to have measured himself at 5ft 5.
Photos by PR Photos
I'm 5 foot 5, so in some shots I need to be on a box and that's something that I'm very used to. But, in this film [The GameChangers], I’m on a box in so many scenes with Joe Dempsie, who’s a couple of inches taller than me, the joke was like, everyone knows I’m really short, so everyone's going to think you're tiny for this entire film!
I don't know what a typical male lead is. People just say, "You're not a typical male lead."
I think it's just because I'm like, 5'5". I think that is literally it. I'm shorter than the average male lead. But that's not really true. Dustin Hoffman is tiny. Tom Cruise is little. There's loads of people who are sort of short with big heads, who … work on camera.
You May Be Interested
Add a Comment1145 comments
Average Guess (118 Votes)
5ft 4.39in (163.6cm)
Jkiller said on 4/Feb/20
Should be about 164cm, don't see any less than that.
Nik said on 1/Feb/20
It would be interesting to know how tall he thinks Tom Cruise is!
said on 31/Jan/20
@Rob do you think he did hit puberty too soon? In the first HP movie, albeit being one year younger, he was the same height as Grint and seemed the kind of preteen with a good chance of reaching average height
I'm not sure he did, just destined to be near 5ft 5
said on 10/Jan/20Click Here
Interesting that in this video on 2001, he's age 12, he's taller than Rupert Grint and has made his voice change. I think that he did a precocious puberty and stop growing early in consequence, that explain why he is so short now.
rohan said on 4/Jan/20
he is honest i think
Ernest said on 3/Jan/20
I think his height is 164cm.
Bobby Brown said on 31/Dec/19
Claimed 5’5 in his wired interview and said that he’s 5’6 with a shoe with a hell eg. A dress shoe or a decently thick sneaker I haven’t seen much though
Estirpe Divina said on 23/Dec/19
Williams said on 17/Oct/19
He can get away with claiming 5’5” fairly easily, although he’s definitely in the 5’4” club.
Miss Sandy Cowell said on 23/Jul/19
🎁🎂 Happy 30th Birthday Daniel! 🎂🎁
To one of the wittiest, most interesting young actors of today - Daniel Radcliffe, who turns 30 today. It seems like 5 minutes ago that he was that bespectacled little boy from Harry Potter. Then he played a young writer/father in 'The Woman in Black', which I snapped up as soon as it came out. I wasn't disappointed.
5ft5 of quality young man! 😁
Damon Blank said on 30/Mar/19
I'll say 5 ft 4 and three quarters. Google has him listed as 5 ft 5 (165cm), and I'll say he's in the middle of 5 ft 4 and a half and 5 ft 5. Still quite short though.
said on 10/Mar/19
What would his eye level be, a shade over 5'0?
Possibly 5ft to 5ft 1/4 range.
said on 11/Feb/19
Hi Rob I recently ran across your site and find it very fascinating. I have some questions if you could kindly answer them. You slightly addressed this elsewhere in your website but I just wanted to clarify, when it comes to the listed heights are they peak, lowest, or somewhere in between height? Also, related to this, when it comes to national studies that study average height like the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), would you happen to know what time of day these heights are recorded for official studies? Do they take it into account at all? Lastly, when it comes to claiming heights, I noticed you claim your lowest height. Why is that and do most people claim their lowest height or do they claim a height earlier in the day. Thank you very much Rob.
In the documentation, it appears that Practitioners visited participants in the study at their homes. So you are talking from 9am to 5pm and probably an average measurement would be around 12-1.
I tend to think of height on this site as not being first thing or last thing but around lunch/early afternoon is reasonable.
said on 10/Feb/19
Rob, what are the chances he measures 5'5" or over? He seems to just claim 5'5" every time, not that he shouldn't claim it, as he's close enough. Are you actually firm with 5'4.5"? Are you 100% sure he is under 5'5" barefoot? I don't know why I'm so curious.
From all the other cast I've met I do think he falls a bit shy of 5ft 5...but it possibly could be 5ft 4.75
Rean emb said on 8/Feb/19
Yesterday in autocompleting his google searches in a video he revealed he was 5.5 feet a bit short of 5 6" so it could possible be 5.5 feet but no more than 5'6"
Paula said on 7/Feb/19
In the recent WIRED Autocomplete interview he claims 5'5.
I think that's beliveable.
Immuno said on 9/Dec/18
Seen him in a London cofee and also met him, we were both in flips and than i am , i’m 1m64.25
Nik said on 4/Dec/18
@ CarmenB - Daniel would appreciate your comments very much!
CarmenB said on 28/Nov/18
Daniel is shorter than average, but his personality is so big that it doesn't matter. The guy is very charming.
Littlelee168cm said on 19/Nov/18
I see 4 inches between him and Tom in that photo speedy added so this listing seems very accurate
Anonynon said on 22/Oct/18
Some photos online give a 5'4" impression and some give a 5'4.5". Never really seems a full 5'5". I think it's really a case of him being between the quarter inch and half inch, but maybe closer to the half?... and then claiming 5'5" with a funky round up? I also think Radcliffe is the type of guy who would count his hair as part of his height, so I will have to give him 5'4.25". There are just far too many pictures online that makes him seem 5'4" flat. Some other height forum lists him at 5'4". ALso, for such a popular celebrity, it would be nice to get his exact height.
said on 15/Oct/18
Here is a recent picture of Tom and Daniel: Click Here
James Keffer said on 7/Oct/18
He seems more likely to be 5'4 flat than 5'4.5. Erin Darke who looks like she's a strong 5'7 appears at least 3 inches taller than him. 5'4.5 would be his MAX imo.
said on 1/Aug/18
I think the listing of 5'4.5" is more or less accurate. I am curious though, Rob, how well do you think Daniel would stack up against Josh Hutcherson? I realize Josh is probably a bit taller, but do you think Daniel could manage to pull off looking about the same size?
In some photos he might look reasonably close.
Rick1 said on 27/Jul/18
Some of the comments are wrong , is dad clearly looks 5’9 , his mom is 5ft though
Warren said on 28/Jun/18
I've seen bunch of people at any other place say that actually met or saw celebrities on the street and still shows no proof with a picture..
MAD SAM said on 15/Jun/18
Looks 161 cm with Erin Darke
said on 2/Jun/18
His dad doesn't look as short as 5'7 to me
Winston Kenyon said on 1/Jun/18
Its because is mum is 4'9 and his dad isn't that small being 5'7.
Titley said on 11/May/18
I'm 5'7" and I've met the man. He was at most my girlfriend's height, 5'4" MAX.
arubani said on 27/Apr/18
Poor lad, he really is short. I've always felt short being 5'10" in a country where the average is over 6 foot but I really don't deserve to complain
said on 11/Apr/18
Hey Rob, How much he weigh? 115 lbs? Something less, something more?
125 at least.
Nik said on 6/Apr/18
He looks his listed height to me!
Tallish89 said on 12/Mar/18
Would be interesting if he was to take a photo with Bruno Mars.
My guess is a strong 5'4 touches 5'5 only in dress shoes
Bobby said on 12/Feb/18
I don't know what it was, but I always pegged him for a 5'6 guy when I was a kid. 1.5 inches off.
Anonim said on 10/Feb/18
Rob, how tall is Erin Dark?
Anonim said on 10/Feb/18
164 of bed, 162,5 night, 163 average.
said on 24/Jan/18
Rob would you say john krokidas the director of kill your darlings is the same height as Daniel?. There's photos of them together on Google and they do look pretty close in height but in some Daniel can look taller and John in others which confuses me though sometimes Daniel stands on tiptoes so can sometimes look taller
They are in a similar kind of range, though John may well be just 5ft 4 flat.
said on 16/Jan/18
Hi Rob, how can this guy be 5'4.5" when 5'5.5" dave franco looks 2.5 inches taller than him in pics?
Well I was planning to give 5ft 5.75 back to franco, as he often can look almost 5ft 6, I think he looked over an inch shorter than jesse eisenberg though...Radcliffe at times can seem barely over 5ft 4.
MJKoP said on 12/Jan/18
Anonymous said on 5/Dec/17
I wonder if he will have a short/tall son.
Depends largely on who the mother is.
Letorgi said on 4/Jan/18
164-165 cm Daniel Radcliffe
Real Cavill said on 16/Dec/17
For such a short guy (Agree he is about 5'4.5") he holds his own on screen. Seems like a good dude and tries hard. I'm a fan. He is also one of the only Harry Pothead characters that grew up not looking like he just exited a space time rift where they aged 3 years for every one earth year. What in the world happened to Draco Malfoy? They're all in their twenties I think but Malfoy looks like he's pushing 50. Rupert Grint looks like a 40 something year old drug addict. Emma Watson looks like a boy and her face looks punched in by the sun. Maybe the stress from college? Maybe its the fast lane lifestyle, but I thought these people had money for face peels and all that.
Anonymous said on 5/Dec/17
I wonder if he will have a short/tall son.
Sandy Cowell said on 11/Nov/17
@ Klapperschlangensindgeil21 - Emma Watson isn't short for a girl, and she's a main member of the 'Harry Potter' cast!
PS Are you, by any chance, German?
Klapperschlangensindgeil21 said on 10/Nov/17
The whole main cast for Harry Potter seems to be short.
Terry said on 8/Nov/17
I would guess Daniel as being a strong 165 in the morning and slightly over 163 at night.
Sacred said on 6/Nov/17
Daniel Radcliffe is 164 cm or 165 cm
said on 6/Nov/17
I reckon he's the same height as me. I've measured myself in the morning, afternoon and evening. In the morning standing at my tallest I'm almost 5'5 1/2 then during the day I'm 5'5 exact. Then at night I'm just a hair under 5'5 at 5'4.90 I think Daniel has the same height as me. But he's probly 5'6 with sneakers like I am. Would I claim my height as 5'5 or 5'4?
Editor Rob: at some point I think Daniel will drop under 5ft 5, but certainly before mid-day I think he would still be close to 5ft 5.
Sandy Cowell said on 28/Oct/17
@ Warren - Hi! I doubt whether I was that hell-bent on noticing which of the two was taller myself! I mean, usually boys outgrow girls, just not in this case! Both grew up to take on new and adventurous parts and I'm sure that the parents of both young actors are as chuffed as any parents have the right to be!
Enjoy your weekend! 😉
Nik said on 28/Oct/17
Daniel looks at least 5'4.5" and at most 5'4.75"!
Warren said on 27/Oct/17
I mean that I always thought he's taller than Emma Watson but seems Emma's taller.. even in the film the last series Harry Potter I didn't notice, yeah and he's so handsome too! completely agree with u
Sandy Cowell said on 21/Oct/17
@ Warren - Hi! For those of us who've had the pleasure of watching Daniel grow up, seeing him stabilize at 5ft4.5 wasn't so staggering at all! He is charming and intelligent and when I saw saw him play a young father in 'The Woman in Black', I felt he was more than capable of playing the lead in an adult ghost story and play older than his years very well to boot!
Who needs to be tall to excel at what he does? Not Daniel!
Warren said on 20/Oct/17
Really surprised he's only 163-164cm?
Jake said on 13/Oct/17
I have seen him before at a festival he was around 5'7 but he had shoes on, so Id say he is about 5'5- or 5'6 barefoot
Shoaib ahmad said on 7/Oct/17
He should be listed as 5,3.5 at his best.
He looks 3inches shorter than Nick Jonas
said on 6/Oct/17Click Here
Here's a picture of Nick Jonas With Daniel Radcliffe.Nick is listed here as 5,6.75 and Daniel is 5,4.5.But you can clearly see in the picture that Nick is minimum 3 inches taller than Daniel
Editor Rob: we should never assume that a famous person doesn't do the 'tip toe trick'...
said on 5/Oct/17
Did Radcliffe get downgradde I thought I remembered him being listed at 5'5? Good call either way this guy is short and yes he is shorter then Emma Watson.
Editor Rob: I was but a young lad the last time Radcliffe seen 5ft 5 on here
Anonymous said on 30/Aug/17
Always seen him as just short of 5'5 around the 164cm mark compared to his fellow Potter actors in the last few films. However with the correct footwear he can appear a strong 5'5 hence his 5'5 and a half claim, his posture is far from great and at times can perhaps make him seem shorter.
Bennett said on 25/Aug/17
Mr Potter is 1m61cm w/o shoes
Vam said on 9/Aug/17
said on 30/Jul/17
Rob, is he seriously only 5 foot 4.5? I knew Harry Potter was short but, seriously? How did you figure this estimate?
Editor Rob: seeing him beside all the other harry potter actors, especially ones i saw up close, I thought around that 4.5 range might be possible.
even said on 18/Jul/17
hes 5 foot 4
even said on 20/Jun/17
A SOLID 5'4 REAL SOLID
said on 8/Jun/17
MJKoP: Not when self reported 5'4 Ken Jeong stands next to Hart does he seem over 5'2.
MJKoP said on 5/Jun/17
Marcello: If anything, it's proof that Hart is taller than 5'2".
S.J.H said on 5/Jun/17
Honestly i always think he best fit as a barefoot 161cm guy at times could pull off 162cm i never see him look over 5'5 with shoes
said on 17/May/17
Also more proof that Radcliffe is 5'2" range -
See Kevin Hart next to Fallon - top of his head is straight in line with Fallon's mouth level.
See Radcliffe next to Fallon - top of his head (including a bit of hair) is straight in line with Fallon's mouth level.
said on 17/May/17
Watch Emile Hirsch meeting Strombo and watch DR meet the same man.
See how Dan's eye level is at Strombo's chin whereas Emile's is at the bottom of Strombo's nose.
said on 17/May/17
He's 5'2.5 at night - Watch him next to Fallon.
Compare 5'5.5" Dave Franco to Fallon.
I myself am 5'4.75 in the morning, 5'4 at night and was exactly the same height - eye to eye - as this man - Vilmos Zsigmond.
See Vilmos next to 6' Travolta.
Danimal said on 15/May/17
5'5" in shoes. 5'3"-5'4" barefoot.
Unknown said on 12/May/17
How many shallow comments?! He is a kinda short, no so short, below 5'3" is so short for a man.
He isn't a child and can't be seen as a child c'mon is it a joke?? Is it heightism?
His height isn't so rare, I am around his height and I know very men with same height or shorter.
Stop it to say that a guy must be 5'7"-5'9" above for getting the girls and to be handsome... if it was that the case, then is the end of the world for us short
said on 15/Apr/17
hi rob, what would be a typical eyelevel for a188cm guy with pretty big head
is 176cm noraml?
Editor Rob: Dale, yes around 176 range might be quite typical...Daniel, when standing with a true 6ft 2 man might only be at the end of the tall man's head.
Bobby said on 23/Mar/17
Growing up, I always thought he looked tall in the movies, and then to my shock discovered, at the time, that he was 5'6. I'm even more shocked to discover that he's been 5'4.5 all this time. That's usually the height of women.
Sandy Cowell said on 7/Mar/17
abe - 158cm? 5ft2, no more? Yes more! 2-and-a-half quality inches to be precise! 😉
abe said on 5/Mar/17
158 cm at most , no more , it can't be
Deepa said on 4/Mar/17
That's freak to know this ...thnkyu
No way said on 17/Feb/17
He's Maybe 5'4 tops
said on 17/Feb/17
Rob, what would be a typical eye level for a 5'5 flat guy, around 1m54?
Editor Rob: yes in and around that zone.
Lily Jarvis said on 13/Feb/17
He is 5'6", which is short but not yet unheard of for a man.
Sally (5'11.5 said on 10/Feb/17
Playboy got it wrong when they asked DR if being short limits his career. Being TINY made his career. They successfully found someone who could look childlike for many years.
Arthur said on 3/Feb/17
If he was at least 5'7 he would have been a very handsome man. He is just like a child.
Potter Fan said on 23/Jan/17
He's so short
Johnny said on 22/Jan/17
He makes average height guys look tall.
MJKoP said on 6/Dec/16
Even with PLATFORM shoes, Harry Potter still couldn't hit 5'9.75. :D
Sandy Cowell said on 28/Nov/16
I saw Daniel on QI and he has a fantastic personality and I found him very interesting and funny! He may only be 5ft4.5, but he is still a prime specimen of manhood and the ideal example of an attractive smaller man!
Gaza2121 said on 23/Nov/16
Mande2013, he actually looks under 5'4" in those pics lmao. But he's probably 5'4" range.
Sam said on 23/Nov/16
Same height as Tom Cruise he says, yeah right. Of course if anyone raises an eyebrow of Tom legitimately looking his listed height people will put it down to lifts as usual. To be fair to Daniel he can look 5'5 at most but maybe this listing is more accurate. I'm not sure.
CD said on 19/Nov/16
5ft 4 flat is definitely too low for him, he never looks more than 4 inches shorter than Tom Felton. In fact I too can still see the almost 5ft 5 argument because in many shots Felton seems to be standing with better posture...
Also 9 times out of 10 James McAvoy has a thicker heel on his shoes as well as likely being a little over 5ft 7.
said on 18/Nov/16
Rob, where do you think his eye-level would be? Right around 5'0? Or 5'0.25?
Editor Rob: mande, probably a good 5ft, his eyelevel isn't that short for his height.
said on 14/Nov/16
Radcliffe may be a small guy, but no way does he look 5'4 flat here: Click Here
I honestly still think he's a weak 5'5er.
I see a weak 5'5 guy here: Click Here
Realist said on 12/Nov/16
5'4 120 max
same said on 7/Nov/16
the more you look at them, the shorter they seem!
same said on 7/Nov/16
some people just keep getting shorter on celebheights!
said on 7/Nov/16
Rob I wouldn't be surprised if he was just 5'4 he looks rather short next to dave Franco
Editor Rob: NC, I think 5ft 4 flat is just too low, although I can see the argument - if you watched him with Tom Felton or Jesse Eisenberg, at times he looks not much over 5ft 4!
oliver said on 2/Nov/16
I would say 5'4 for him and 5'4.5 for Emma Watson. He looks half inch shorter than her.
VeryShortRussianDude said on 1/Nov/16
Strong 163cm IMO so 5'4.5 is like a roundup height for Radcliffe, I'd bet good money he dips a little under 5'4.5 on the nose.
RainbowBlaster5 said on 24/Oct/16
Zoe Kazan ssemed taller than him in "What if" and she was in flats and he was in shoes , it's the scene where the postmans letters go flying all about and they help him if I'm not mistaken.
S.J.H said on 1/Oct/16
5'4.5 is right also 5'4.25 could be lowest
Pita ji said on 16/Sep/16
He is no more than 5 foot 3.5 out of bed dave franco is 5 foot 5 he look almost 2 inches shorter than dave.
heightmaster3000 said on 29/Aug/16
I really think 5,4.5 might even be pushing it a bit. I was shocked how tiny he looked next to Eisenberg and Franco in the movie as well as red carped pictures. As low as 1,62 is not out of the question if you ask me. BUT I have to say I think it's amazing how comfortable he seems to be with his height. There never seem to be any attempts to make him look closer to his co-stars and as far as I can tell he doesn't seem to wear lifts either. He reminds me of MJF in that regard. That shows alot of confidence.
www said on 25/Aug/16
at least shorter people have less of a height loss than taller ones. good for harry.
mande2013 said on 24/Aug/16
McAvoy has a clear footwear advantage in all those pictures with Daniel. I'm telling you people, he's a weak 1m65.
said on 24/Aug/16
Okay, I'm gonna say it. I still think DR looks close to 5'5 here: Click Here
Dave Franco is quite obviously sporting lifts. But come on, assuming Ruffalo and Eisenberg are 5'7 and changers, nowhere is Daniel pushing 5'4 flat. The 5'4.75 listing may have been more on the money. MJ Fox would look smaller in this picture. It's Daniel's thin frame that gives the illusion he's closer to 5'4 than 5'5.
said on 23/Aug/16
how low will rob go on daniel radcliffe? that is the question.
Editor Rob: if he reaches 80 he'll be 5ft 3
Jazz said on 15/Aug/16
I wasn't sure Rob would downgrade him again or Emma. Even though I always thought Emma looked a fraction taller.
Aditya. said on 13/Aug/16
Height is always not a problem, Generosity is.
Talent and hardwork beats hollow appearance all the bloody time.
said on 12/Aug/16
Hey Rob, I appreciate that you downgrade Daniel's height because 5ft 4.5 seems correct. But near James Mcavoy, Tom Felton and Dave Franco Daniel seems to be 5ft 4.25 or 5ft 4. Personally I think Daniel is around 5ft 4, what do you think Rob?
Editor Rob: I think he probably measured 5ft 5.5 in a shoe, that is believable and why he joked about rounding up to 5ft 6. 5ft 4 he can look at times, but then a guy like mcavoy ain't a weak 5ft 7, he might be like me a little over the mark but nobody is going to say a tiny amount like that.
Word1234 said on 9/Aug/16
@mat very interesting photos, Daniel with his Harry Potter cast seems to hold up to those weak 5'5 claims, but when you see him with Macavoy, Franco, joe Jonas he looks like he's barely pushing 5'4.
Must be witchcraft and wizardry :p
said on 3/Aug/16
I believe that Radcliffe is 5'4 flat.
Editor Rob: I wouldn't go that low but I think 5ft 4.5 is quite realistic.
Leonardo said on 20/Jul/16
He and Emma Watson are 5'4.25 (163 cm) and no more.
said on 13/Jul/16
Oi check this out! Daniel guilty of tip toeing! ;-) Click Here
To be fair to Daniel, there is no way he would only be a flat 5'4, but he also fails to pass for a 5'5 man in every photo out there. A weak 5'5 man should pass sometimes for 5'5 but he never does. He is just definitely over 5'4 but unknown how much over it. Click Here Click Here
Unless Tom Felton hasn't grown since the editor met him ( to me he has the proportions of a 5'10 man, he could even look tall amongst the small cast of HP ), then I can see Daniel as 5'4.5 on the dot! He and Bruno Mars may be the exact height.
lol said on 8/Jul/16
some people just keep getting shorter on celebheights...
miko said on 7/Jul/16
In Cruise is in lifts he could well be looking over Dan's head!
Alex said on 3/Jul/16
I met him some years ago. He was like 30 cm shorter then me. I think 164 is right.
said on 2/Jul/16
Rob do you think 5'4 on the dot would be a better listing and more accurate? After seeing him in now you see me 2 it seems unlikely that he would be closer to 5'5? What do you think, a slight downgrade in the possible future?
Editor Rob: 5ft 4.5 may well be closer for Daniel...I think he can struggle to look near 5ft 5 half the time.
said on 29/Jun/16
Hey rob I just saw now you see me 2 and when Daniel stands next to dave Franco, Dave Franco has him by a couple of Iniches Daniel looked more 5'2-5'3 compared to Franco who is 167cm do you think that's possible?
Editor Rob: Radcliffe wouldn't be that short, although I'm sure he can look 5ft 4 at times.
said on 23/Jun/16
Rob is 5'4 flat possible? He looks really short.
Editor Rob: at times you could say he looks 5ft 4-4.5 zone
Lee said on 19/Jun/16
He's not a lot shorter than tom cruise. Tom is scraping 5'7 maybe even a weak 5'7 and Daniel is 5'5" at the shortest. 2 inches isn't exactly a big gap
said on 11/Jun/16Click Here
Not the best picture but Dave Franco looks quite a bit taller than daniel Radcliffe.
For some reason every picture of Daniel Radcliffe he looks like 5'2. I struggle to see him anywhere close to 5'4.75. Honestly.
tiny said on 10/Jun/16
L said on 4/Jun/16
I am just bit under 5'6. I've stood next to Daniel and 5'4 might even be stretching it. He is quite small.
said on 22/May/16
Hey Rob, apparently Daniel thinks he is about the same height as Tom Cruise, who is 3 inches taller? From Playboy
Does being short limit his career? “I don’t think so. Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise have very different careers, and they’re both about the same height as I am.''
Editor Rob: Daniel's in for a big shock when he shakes Tom's hand for the first time!
Mat said on 14/May/16
I think that he would have been an alpha male if he was 5'10 (or above of course). Height plays a major role in appearance unfortunately. If he wasn't famous, any girl would pick an average (or even below average) looking 5'10 guy over him any day.
ND said on 26/Jan/16
do you think 164,5 could be daniel's end of the day height or his out of bed height?
mande2013 said on 23/Jan/16
@MD, In that last picture that you pronounce the killer, I see a 3.5 inch difference between Radcliffe and McAvoy, but it's possible the latter's wearing lifts while DR has normal footwear on, because in other picture with the two of them the difference didn't seem that large.
said on 13/Jan/16
@Rob & @Ouch,
Some better photo from one of the events pictured in the article you linked to. Notice McAvoy is not standing to his fool height in just about any of them, and we know he's only 5'7".
At another event. McAvoy may have a bit of a footwear advantage, here:
The killers, though:
plus said on 31/Dec/15
No more than 164,5 and he is very similar to Pablo Motos. Both removed their shoes for a test in a program. Pablo Motos claims 167 cm, some years ago in an article about shoe lifts it said he was 166 cm, but Motos is 165 cm.
Lol said on 21/Nov/15
I always assume people are a half inch or so taller than they are listed on this site
said on 15/Nov/15
Several new pics of Radcliffe with James McAvoy: Click Here
There seems to be at least 3in difference between them, maybe even more.
said on 15/Nov/15Click Here
Daniel Radcliffe clearly wearing lifts ^ - very short guy, as most child actors tend to be. I think this is because casting directors would choose younger looking children as they're more likely to stay looking younger throughout shooting.
MJKoP said on 8/Nov/15
Lawrence194cm said on 26/Oct/15
Daniel Radcliffe seems a pretty tall and wiry bloke. When he stood next to Severus Snape he can't have been more than an inch or taller smaller than him. I'd put the lad somewhere between 178 and 181 cm. The character Harry Potter was always meant to be around 6'1" in adulthood so I guess they did the casting pretty well.
As hilariously wrong as this may be, I almost find it to be refreshing after all the ridiculous downgrading that takes place on this site!
Lawrence194cm said on 26/Oct/15
Daniel Radcliffe seems a pretty tall and wiry bloke. When he stood next to Severus Snape he can't have been more than an inch or taller smaller than him. I'd put the lad somewhere between 178 and 181 cm. The character Harry Potter was always meant to be around 6'1" in adulthood so I guess they did the casting pretty well.
Ron said on 11/Sep/15
He's always looked a little taller to me... I think he may actually be the 5'5 he claims, maybe with the half out of bed. He just seems to edge Watson out very slightly and he never looks that much smaller than Grint who I peg at 5'8. His height suits him, he's got the right build for it! And he never has problems asserting screen presence either, so all in all a pretty impressive stature!
said on 8/Sep/15
Hey Rob, isnt 5'4.75 more like 164,5 so 165cm? Or am i wrong?
[Editor Rob: 164.465, so since that mark is nearer 164 than 5 I display the closest cm.]
mande2013 said on 20/Aug/15
I guess this downgrade was inevitable, but in most Western countries, I'd say males in the 164-169 range are all treated pretty much the same socially anyway.
said on 5/Aug/15
Rob, now that I have grown a fraction do you think I'm as tall as Daniel yet? I'm a good 5ft 4 5/8ths (well last time I measured a week or so ago), and at worst around 5ft 4.5 on the dot. Out of bed a fraction over 5ft 5.
I know you haven't measured him, but could he still edge me barefoot?
[Editor Rob: CD, I think radcliffe probably falls into the 5ft 4.75-5 zone if you measured him.]
CD said on 23/Jul/15
It looks more like 2.5 minimum shorter, maybe 3 at most. So he's over the 5 foot 4 mark, probably close to 5ft 4.75 given the footwear. Daniel looks more than an inch above James's eyes, so I can't see the difference being in the 3.5 inch range.
the shredder said on 21/Jul/15
With James MCavoy he looks 3.5 minimum shorter , even if James has boots he can't be more than 5'4.5
Parker said on 19/Jul/15
Same height and build as Michael J Fox. 164 is my guess.
said on 15/Jul/15
He confirmed in this interview that he is 5'5": Click Here
Shaun said on 4/Aug/12
Met him last year. I'm 167cm and we were wearing similar footwear and he was at least an inch shorter ! I say 163cm at most.
Blue Owl said on 29/Jul/12
It doesn't matter how tall he is,it matters what he has achieved.he is enriched with millions of his fans.it's not easy to have at all.
Joe said on 26/Jul/12
Even small ones can have milions and milions of dollars... Yhea... I agree he's around 5ft5(165cm).. maby closer to 163-164cm, but nobody can say that he hasn't risen high on life. :-)
That5'9Dude said on 14/Feb/12
Damn, he's only 5'5!? That's a huge shocker. I thought he was at least 5'9!
Voiceless Dental Fricative said on 6/Feb/12
He looks 4 inches shorter than Tom Felton, which is the best evidence he's 5'4.5ish.
Silent d said on 29/Jan/12
I got towered on the jonathon ross show. Some people say jonathon ross is 180cm. That'll make daniel 158cm. People make me laugh sometimes. Daniel is 165cm.
said on 29/Jan/12
That girl is the same height as Daniel Radcliffe in her bare feet. Click Here
Jenna said on 29/Jan/12
When I met him at How To Succeed he looked 5'6"
Jenna said on 29/Jan/12
When I met him he looked 5'6"
MariA said on 4/Jul/09
Honestly, when you're as gorgeous as Daniel, short or tall doesn't matter. He's a beautiful fellow, whatever his height.
said on 30/Jun/09
That's what I thought too, Anonymous. If Rupert is to continue at 5'7.75" than Dan can't be more than 5'4" (and technically less). So either Dan is 5'4" or Rupert is around 5'9". Either way, one of them can't continue to be listed at the same height... Click Here
and for shoe comparison: Dan's: Click Here
Rupert has on the same shoes Ron has had for ages now, but: Click Here
- Rupert and Dan look to have around the same amount of shoe there...
Anonymous said on 27/Jun/09
Looked about 4 inches shorter than 5'8 Rupert Grint in 2007. And I highly doubt he has grown since then. He still looks about 4 inches shorter than Grint in the last DH pictures.
dave said on 26/Jun/09
damn, yeah.... sorry! my mistake!
umad80 said on 25/Jun/09
Dave, you can just click the link? This website means celebheights. Jason Isaacs is 5'11" and Tom Felton is 5'8.5" LOL
crababal said on 25/Jun/09
dave u got it wrong ur thinking of tom felton "the other malfoy" ;) but yeah he is prob less than 5'5 being dwarfed by 5'8 tom felton
dave said on 24/Jun/09
umad 80 .......... wrong. check the main page, or look up jason isaacs on this site and youll find a VERY interesting pic of him with 5'8 rob, not a cm over 5'8 for isaacs. Anyway, radcliffes max height is 5'5, he could be less.
said on 23/Jun/09
Heh. "Lucious Malfoy" aka Jason Isaacs is 5'11" per this site: Click Here
- Although I'm pretty sure Dan is 5'5" and I think he's one to really lose height at night.
dave said on 23/Jun/09
if HE measured himself at 5'5, and considering hes DWARFED by 5'8-ish lucius malfoy, then id say he could be in the 5'4 range
ZAQ said on 22/Jun/09
can someone come up with a height chart for this kid?
i think i can figure it out
in 2001 when he was 12
he looked roughly 4'11 judging by when he was on regis and kellys show
so if i can figure it out this is how he grew
14 5'3 1/2
So to answer everyones question he was done growing in early 2005 like around harry potter and goblet of fire.
so when exactly did he stop growing you ask.
at the age of 15 1/2
MissElizabeth said on 22/Jun/09
I'm not sure on Daniels height he looks to be about 5'5 5'6 to me. Either way they cast a character based on looks and talent. And at the beginning of the books Potter is characterized as being scrawny and small for his age. And yes he did have a huge growth spurt in book 5 but putting all that aside he's a great actor and the movies are awesome I don't think anyone will really care that he's not the proper height for the part.
Michael said on 21/Jun/09
My father's wife worked with him on a project and said he was shorter than her. She's not a tall woman at all. I'd believe 5'5". Short guy, wouldn't have imagined Harry Potter being that short, as he appears much taller on screen.
teddy89 said on 21/Jun/09
i think he's around 5'5 and nothing else. me and daniel were born exactly the same day (july 23, 1989) and i probably will grow max 1 cm (to 5'8 to 5'8,5). The fact that we've got exactly the same years maybe doesn't mean anything but i think that he could go to 5'5,5 max!!!
Josh.J said on 17/Jun/09
he's now what 19?20? although he still has a window for growth, its very small. maybe could get 1~2 inches. anyway how tall is harry potter supposed to be at the end of the series? i got the impression that he was fairly tall though he wasnt close to the wealeys.
Rika said on 15/Jun/09
He has a chance to grow taller, 3 years left in him. So 5'6 could be possible, but i cant imagine anymore than that.
Curtis C. said on 10/Jun/09
Maybe I overreacted when it got on my nerves about others regarding my comments on Dan's height, so it is offical that Dan is 5'5" and that he's all right being at that height. Even though Dan hasn't grow tall enough, I thought Dan would probably to be at least 5'8" or 5'9". At least that's what I think. So he will remain at 5'5" despite other comments saying he needs to grow so more.
umad80 said on 9/Jun/09
Curtis C., not to add to people proving you wrong here, but while Dan once said he was 5'6" he later recanted and has said several times since then that he's only 5'5". There is actually video of him saying it, so I'd say that's pretty clear on his height...
Rika said on 9/Jun/09
Curtis, MAgs and sites say alot of things. Rey Mysterio(WWE) had been listed 5'6 for 20 years.
The man is obviously shorter than that, but he is still listed as that.
Brad pitt had been listed at 6'1, he's 5'10 aswell as Justin Timberlake.
Now would you believe what they tell you, or believe what you see?
5'5 seems right.
Curtis C. said on 8/Jun/09
Void or whoever you are, can you and the other people stop trying to prove me wrong about my comments of any of the celeb heights? Who cares? It doesn't really matter as long you make good comments about someone's height and I think Dan is 5'6." That's the height he's listed at.
Void said on 7/Jun/09
Curtis C. He has not 5'6 (168) height. Her height is 165 max. Emma has 162 - 165 max height. Daniel is not thaller than Emma. In HP part five Natalia Tena - Tonk (she has 166) is taller than Dan because he has 164 cm max !
Curtis C. said on 3/Jun/09
I always thought that Dan would grow taller to be at least 5'8" or 5'9", but apparently it looks like he will remain at 5'6" 'cause he's nearly about to be 20 in two months. At least he won't considered to be too short though.
umad80 said on 29/May/09
Med, when you have two people who are so obviously close to the same height, the angle of the pic will throw it off. That's basically what is happening in your pics. Most of the ones in your first batch, Dan either looks the same height, maybe a half inch smaller, and one he looked really tiny... D & E are basically the same height (I would go with 5'5" for sure) it's just Rupert that seems to be the biggest mystery. lol
Koa said on 28/May/09
In HP part five Natalia Tena - Tonk (she has 166) is taller than Dan... He has
164 cm max !
Einstein said on 26/May/09
so to be precise, what is his height ???
im getting confused from so many ppl stating different heights
Mike67 said on 21/May/09
Ok, I don't have a problem with him being below average height, but why on earth is he listed as 5'8 on some websites??? I can understand his 5'6 listing on many sites because it's a well know fact most celebs use their height in shoes but 3 inches? cmon!
HS said on 20/May/09
what's wrong with being short? I mean, he's prolly 5'5 or so, but whats wrong with that? i am 15 and about 5'6 and im a one of the shorter ppl in my skool.. there's nothing wrong with celebrites being short...
jade said on 19/May/09
i think he's just 5'4. but it was just based on his pictures in the internet. not sure about that
Shereen said on 18/May/09
Seriously, in the book he got so much taller, I wonder if he wore heels, and is actually shorter than 5'5
Katrina said on 1/May/09
Daniel should wear heels for the remaining Potter movies as Haryy had a growth spurt in book 5 but Daniel never did.
Lenad said on 19/Apr/09
He's 166cm max. Probably a weak 5'5 like 164-165cm.
umad80 said on 16/Apr/09
LJ, I think that's just a bit absurd. heh. What I mean is, the casting department is going to look for: looks (I mean, more looking right for the part), embodies the part, has chemistry with co-stars, etc. While shortness can derail you from parts - this is a fact - and in todays society, most people will see a 16 year old as tall rather than short. That said, I don't think Dan's height will be a disadvantage for the most part, but there is no denying that it's harder for a shorter person in the business. Take Seth Green for example... he's gotten great parts, but no one considers him a leading man. Now, a lot of this has to do with the parts he's chosen, but him being 5'4" is also a disadvantage. No one is going to really take it seriously if his female co-star looks 6" taller. This is not a slam against Dan or his height, but the fact that it's all visual, and with most people... short guy and tall girl is odd, but tall guy and short girl is more appealing. Sometimes it's even hard for a girl who is tall if the guy is more average. It all has its issues, but sometimes it can be a blessing just with anything else.
LJ said on 14/Apr/09
I, wanting to become an actor myself, know that in the acting world, being short is an advantage. Say for example theres a part of a 16 year old boy on offer and theres two people come for the audition ( not very realistic, but just bear with me) . If one of them is a sixteen year old and is quite good at acting - well- he's got a chance. But if the other is a 19 year old who is short and looks a few years younger than their actual age, and he's good at acting, they'll probably choose the nineteen year old because he's probably got more acting experience and more life experience to draw on his emotions and create his character.
Clay said on 12/Apr/09
"Anonymous says on 24/Mar/09
Not having grown for a year or two does not mean you will never have a growth spurt again. I was 5'8 from 13 onwards and then at 19 I shot up to over 6 foot. Now I am 6'4.
Lenad said on 10/Apr/09
Look at how much shorter than other guys he looks in Harry Potter movies. He's 5'5 at the most.
Curtis C. said on 6/Apr/09
Ok, so Dan is all right at being at 5'6."
Geoffrey said on 6/Apr/09
Saw him Equus and he's maybe 5'6 tops. Since he was in the altogether for a good part of the play I can also tell you that's he's all man and done most of his growing(our little Harry is actual rather hairy truth be told :-))!)and not likely he will get much taller. Oh well lots of big stars are of diminutive stature.. Tom Cruise, Elijah Wood, All Pacino, Dustin Hoffman.. he in good company.
Curtis C. said on 4/Apr/09
Listen, "Lily," it is possible that Dan might grow at least 1 or 2 inches because the height growth ends between 21 to 25.
Anonymous said on 2/Apr/09
he's smalL becAuse it'lL be unfair if he's also talL. He's already handsoMe (i thInk so!), a very goOd and talenteD aCtor,, a very rich guy, and a famOus hearthrob, alL over the world. Many woMan in every part in thIs world are dreaming to be with h
Curtis C. said on 31/Mar/09
Well, listen here, "Lily." Even though Dan is almost 20, he might will at least grow 1 or 2 more inches. Height growth is until you're 21 to 25.
Anonymous said on 24/Mar/09
Actually, Daniel hasn't really grown up since 2003 or 2004, so I don't see why he would suddenly have a growth spurt now at the age of 19(almost 20). He's no taller than 5'5 and he's admitted it. He will never be taller. Maybe 1 cm at most. He was an early bloomer
lily said on 19/Mar/09
curtis, there is no way daniel can grow upto 5'9. he's gonna be 20 in july and u should know that a 5'5 guy cant just grow 4 inches at that age.
Leon said on 19/Mar/09
I'm 5'8" in my bare feet and I'm still taller than the majority of girls. Daniel, who looks shorter than many of women he poses with in photos, must be around 5'5" or 5'6". I doubt his height will damage his acting career, though. He's talented and he's a good-looking boy. Elijah Wood and Tom Cruise have done reasonably well for themselves, wouldn't you agree? No reason Daniel can't follow in their footsteps.
Curtis C. said on 14/Mar/09
Even though Dan is quite a short person, he might be to grow two to three inches, possibly putting him at least 5'9.
lily said on 8/Mar/09
that's rubbish. just because he's short doesn't mean "he won't get that much work".
he's good at acting and that's what will keep him getting work.
Ali020202 said on 4/Mar/09
It looks like he never realy grew properly. 5ft5 is realy short for a male aily, let alone in films and hollywood. I wonder if this will mean he won't get that much work as most female co-stars will tower over him.
Anonymous said on 1/Mar/09
He always looks considerably short. I can't believe some people thought he was 5'8 or 5'9. If he's that tall, then Alan Rickman must be 6'5 and the Phelps brothers must be like 6'7 or 6'8. Daniel is 5'4-5'5. Never looks taller.
Comets said on 25/Feb/09
Wow I actually thought he was atmost 5'9
said on 22/Feb/09Click Here
I think he says 5'4" someone earlier said that he said 5'5" I'm not sure...
glenn said on 16/Feb/09
linda-its not my site.i respect peoples opinions as long as they dont assume or pass judgement on what i do or say.i unfortunately make a living like this.yes.i have a interest in how tall or short celebrities are.and i contribute cause of this.not take pics for the site.the site had been around for 4 years or so.ive been around for 20 years posing with celebs.your intitial post to me that started this conversation,i found wise ass or snotty.thats the way most would take it.sorry if i stressed you.im very strong in expressing myself as you can see.do enjoy the site if you decide to stick around.i sincerly hope you do.if not,i wish you well.thank you for clarifying which kennedy.not robert kennedy,who was shot as well.i do know.oh,by the way.no,i dont know celebrities personally.but i am an expert on how receptive they are in public.and how tall they are.daniel im sure is a sweet guy.not in public as much.
Linda said on 14/Feb/09
Glenn, I apologize for my error in typing. Yes, I do know who PM is because unlike you, I can actually say that I know where I was when Kennedy was shot (President Kennedy - just in case you don't know). Your observation is correct, obtaining a person's autograph does not mean that the autograph seeker "knows" the individual. Which brings me to my next question - "How are you any different?" Aren't you simply getting your picture taken with someone and then assuming that you know them? If you aren't interested or respect other comments, then why do you have this site. I mean unless you take a photo next to a celebrity, have them take their shoes off and put a measuring stick next to them - observations about heights is in the eye of the beholder.
Don't freak out towards other people. It's great that you have the opportunity to meet this people - some of us have lives where we can afford to see them perform and receiving an autograph/picture is no big deal. Not a business or obsession as it seems to be with you. I seriously doubt if Mr. Radclffe or any other celebrity really cares what you or I think of them. I think it's time to get back to reality. Good luck with your job - as I assume this is what you do for work.
glenn said on 14/Feb/09
thats paul mccartney.not mcarthy.you know.a beatle.saw him again tonight.the biggest celebrity alive.period.i could give a rats ass about anyones autograph,yet i still read dumb comments below,from the likes of roobz or anyone in the past.i dont make judgements from meeting someone once.your all clueless and missing the point.you only assume,and make trouble for me.none of you people met more than one celebrity or 2,or none at all,yet your all experts on them.or their height as well.those in their stubborn beliefs that is,not the reasonable posters.and your an expert of what i do or who i am.always the same robotic,one dimensional,predictable responses or answers.and i do this all for free,yet still get shat on.sorry to disappoint me.ha,the mere mention of radcliffe makes me yawn when on rare occassion a friend or peer will bring up if i want to go meet him.i usually go home or find a-list or b-list names to go for.ta ta.
Linda said on 13/Feb/09
Glenn, I'm rather amused that my comment generated such a dramatic response from you. Sorry to disappoint you but obtaining an autograph from Mr. Radcliffe wasn't all that difficult. Paul McCarthy/Keith Richards? Boring!!!
Now that I know that the heights are simply your observation, I won't bother to check it out.
Sean said on 8/Feb/09
I met Daniel at a press junket a year or so ago. I'm 6 ft and he was hovering around my shoulder. So 5ft 5 in borderline 5 ft 6 in, if it really matters.
Roobz said on 8/Feb/09
hey every who passes judgement on celebrities 'snob' 'dick' etc. how can you determine whether or not they are a snob if you don't know them personally?
Just because you maybe didn't get an autograph when you were accosting them doesn't mean they are bad people. Glenn.
FOR Glenn said on 8/Feb/09
I know you have answered this before (like a million times) but could you tell me if this urban myth of growing after the age of 20 is true?
lily said on 4/Feb/09
Ecurb: even if you're 5'7 and daniel looked 3 inches shorter than you, it doesn't make him 5'2 or 5'3.
do the math!!!
Ecurb said on 2/Feb/09
Stood just a few feet from him on 1/29 while he was signing autographs after an Equus performance. I'm 5'7" and am AT LEAST 3 inches taller than Mr. R. I'd guess 5'2" or 5'3".
5 ft 3.2 said on 31/Jan/09
I'm pretty sure that he is 5 ft 5.5 I have a picture somewhere on my computer of Emma and Daniel standing next to each other. She's wearing flipflops and he's wearing regular flats. He's about half an inch taller than her 5 ft 5 frame. Anyways, if he hates his height so much, he can just have an operation to change it. He has enough money for 20 of them. The operation can add 2-3 inches to him.
Rituparna Ganguly said on 29/Jan/09
It doesn't matter
wheather Dan's height
is 5'5" or 5'7". What
matters is his talent. He
is a talented actor.
Many people have
rocked the world with
their talent n capability-
height couldn't prevent
them. One of them is
lily said on 25/Jan/09
i don't think 5'4.5 is tall ENOUGH for a guy, but i'll tell you one celebrity who's even smaller than that... RAY MYSTERIO
he's only 5'3 and he's amazing.
there's nothing wrong with ur height and tell those classmates to get off ur case.
Bruce said on 23/Jan/09
hes 167 cm a bit over 5 ft 5 in
Bashful said on 20/Jan/09
...Is 5'4.5 tall enough!...
...My classm8s are teasing me,..That im too small in our class,..Tell me some celebrity,..With the same height with me...
Anonymous said on 17/Jan/09
glenn... i think for some young people Daniel is a lot cooler then Oaul Mccartney and Keith who-ever. stop the attitude ugly old man.
rahul said on 16/Jan/09
i think he is about 5'6 or 5'7 fit, not more than....thats it.
glenn said on 15/Jan/09
i could give a rats ass about daniels autograph.it worthless to boot.wouldnt mind a photo with him,but apparently i never put in the time.gee,what does that say? perhaps a could give a toss about him period.he has been in new york for months too.oooo,congrats you obtained his autograph on your napkin.frame it.i spanked(a.k.a,pounded,hammered,went to town,had a signing)paul mccartney today and got the photo with(not my first with him by the way).so i have better things to do.keith richards left me a lovely xmas gift.daniels been nothing but a snob that sneaks out of places nowadays.leave a comment with assuming you know it all,and you get a lovely response from me.i love people like you.ta ta.
Linda said on 14/Jan/09
Glenn you originally wrote back 3 years ago that Daniel Radcliffe was polite even though he had passed by you a couple of times. For some reason you seem rather bitter that a busy young actor was unable to stop and give you your photo. I happen to have his autograph and he is a very polite young man. Let it go Glenn.
umad80 said on 7/Jan/09
Where is the passage that it says he grew 10cm? It seems like an odd sort of statement considering they're from Harry's POV and I only remember Mrs. Weasley commenting on Harry having grown. So you'll have to quote that part of the book because I honestly just don't recall it...
It is funny how much they are different from their characters in basically height only. lol
Anonymous said on 6/Jan/09
Harry grew a lot between books 5 and 6 but he was initially pretty short. I think Harry was about 5'4-5'5 in book 5 and it is said that he has grown about 10 cm. So he's probably 5'9 in book 6 and 5'10 in book 7. Ron has always been way taller than Harry but I don't think he's that extremely tall. Probably 6'2 in book 7. As for Hermione, I'd also say 5'4.
And I think Neville is pretty short in the books, like 5'6, but he's tall in the movies. And Draco is said to be slightly taller than Harry so probably 5'11 for him.
lily said on 6/Jan/09
he really is 5'5??? isn't that pretty short compared to the average height in men???
Sean said on 4/Jan/09
I believe judging from what J.K. Rowling wrote that the characters heights are
Harry:5'10" (taking into account he was said to be very skinny) Ron:6'1", Hermione:5'4"
umad80 said on 3/Jan/09
It would depend on what JKR considers 'tall'. It's funny, I only remember Mrs. Weasley commenting on Harry getting taller. But that doesn't mean he's 6' because he had "gotten taller" because we don't know how tall he was previously. Now, I haven't read the books in over a year, but I don't ever remember them specifying an actual height. In any case, Dan is definitely shorter than Harry, but we're just not sure of how much shorter... But then, none of the actors are really the heights their suppose to be. Even the twins who are suppose to be short and whatnot. hehe
&ierra said on 30/Dec/08
Im taller than him.
Anonymous 2 said on 30/Dec/08
Arikado, Harry couldn't be 5'8. Despite what JKR said in the earlier books in the last three if I ain't wrong he grew a lot and beeing described by being tall in the last book so I guess that he was at least 5'10" and maximum 6'
Anonymous said on 23/Dec/08
I think Harry's supposed to be about 5'11". Ron ,6'2"/6'3", Hermione, 5'3"/5'4".
None of the actors are right. Hhaha.
Arikado said on 22/Dec/08
5 foot 5 is right for him.. if he was over 6'0 that wouldn't be right for harry. i think harry's maximum height is 5'8.
anonymous said on 2/Dec/08
you really are tall when you wake up in the morning, it's because the ligaments in between your spinal cord strectch when youre lying in bed. your original height will be back few minutes later
teddy89 said on 11/Nov/08
in a picture close to ralph fiennes(180cm), he's a head shorter than him. so i think max 1.62 m
Evanna said on 5/Nov/08
Dan Radcliffe commenting on his height again (New York Post via Wenn News):
Radcliffe Enjoys Anonymity In NYC
5 November 2008 4:17 AM, PST
Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe is enjoying his run in Broadway play Equus - because he can go unrecognised in the busy New York streets.
The actor, 19, is currently living in the U.S. while starring in the live stage show, and he insists the Big Apple provides welcome relief to his native U.K., where he is constantly spotted by fans.
And Radcliffe is convinced it is his diminutive height - he is 1.6 metres (5 foot, 5 inches) - that keeps him from being noticed.
He tells the New York Post, "The other day, I walked through Battery Park City up around Wall Street for about two hours, and I wasn't stopped once. I'm so short, no one notices me."
Well as we know 1.6m is actually 5'3", not 5'5". But anyway he hasn't grown.
Eve said on 2/Nov/08
Ive always thought Daniel is only about 5'2". Emma looks taller than he is in the newest potter series who is supposed to be 5'5".
joe II said on 31/Oct/08
Anonymouse3 = uber ignorant.
when was this last updated?
Anonymous3 said on 29/Oct/08
tallone I advise you to stfu, just because there are more freaks than USUAL does not classify them as NORMAL. And yes I will visit UCLA sometime. O wait what's the point of wasting my time when I could just live my own wealthy life. No need to get my hands dirty. Roffle
BTW I bench press 325 lbs. So I'm sure I could do quite some damage unarmed. I would indeed last more than a minute because women can't fight. Sorry, I meant women can't fight for $***. I could probably take your whole company of freaks on with a drink in hand (a cooler) and a Cuban cigar. Get over it buddy for there to be normal people in this world, there has to be an elite group of freaks somewhere. thanks for the waste of space with the roster list
Have an nice day.
haze said on 29/Oct/08
listing sounds about right. not sure on the shrinking though. im sure it affects everyone differently. im 6'3 on the dot before i go to sleep and have measured 6'3.75 morning. i also weigh 280 pounds and have a vigorous physical schedule. so i cant judge on radcliffe. short for sure though
Dave said on 27/Oct/08
No, it's not true, in Hungary the average is 5'6" (170 cm). So WE ARE the shortest in Europe.
umad80 said on 27/Oct/08
To be fair, not everyone shrinks at night. Some people do stay the same height all around. For instance, I have measured myself and stay the same height I always am (after the initial waking up of being 5'6"). I don't know the general rule, if most people shrink at night or not. But the point I was making is that if people think Dan is 5'4" at night, but during the day he is 5'5" then you can assume he will definitely look shorter at night and people will get his height wrong. I thought that made perfect sense.
Teddy89 said on 27/Oct/08
In italy the average is 5'8.5 (174cm) and we are the shortest in europe! Him, to be english, is quite short!
lene said on 27/Oct/08
he really looks short in the Harry Potter series..perhaps it's really the genes, but being in the spotlight at a really young age could also be a reason. i believe that, scientifically, young celebrity stars don't grow as much as they should because they are exposed to the spotlight. i think i heard from a news clip that the heat coming from the spotlight affects the pituitary gland. examples are the olsen twins?.. well, i'm not really sure though.
glenn said on 26/Oct/08
ill never forget when he ran by me a few times,3 years ago,ignored my photo requests,and looked 5-4.
Anonymous said on 26/Oct/08
It is possible. Daniel's mum is very short, under 5', so in his case the lack of inches is hereditary.
teddy89 said on 25/Oct/08
I was born july the 23,1989 (exactly like him!) but i'm 5'8.5 (174 cm) and when i was 15 i was tall 5'3!! How is possible he didn't grow in 3 years?
andy said on 24/Oct/08
people add an inch at night, their spine straightens out as they sleep. Thats why everyone is taller in the morning.
Anonymous said on 21/Oct/08
Umad, why do you find it necessary to say that he shrinks at night, don't most people shrink a bit at night?
Anonymous said on 21/Oct/08
That's a huge growth spurt Kyla, highly abnormal I'd reckon --> 1.5 inches about (assuming that your "littles" count as .25". Lol, and Torny, did you whip out a tape measure because, if you did, that would be awesome.
Ahleks said on 16/Oct/08
people who grow two inches after reaching age 19 are like one-in-a-million.
Kyla said on 13/Oct/08
I was a 1/4" shy of 5'8" all through high school, now at age 24 I am a lil over 5'9", so some females do have small growth spurts after age 18!
Torny said on 10/Oct/08
At Mme Tussauds' in London he was around my height (170 cm=> 5f7). They may have lied...
umad80 said on 9/Oct/08
Er, I've heard of males growing pass the age of 18, that does happen. But to say all grow pass 18? No, the average, common age is 18 for men and 16 for females. Most females, in fact, stop growing at 15 like I myself did. The growth deal is is a puberty thing, so the idea that everyone grows in their twenties is a bit far fetched, though something that can happen. (I think it's more likely for males for some reason though. I've never heard any female say they've grown pass the age of 18, really... but I'm sure someone, somewhere has.)
But on the subject of Dan - height wise, it's obvious he is 5'5". Though I think it is possible he shrinks at night.
Alma Carey said on 7/Oct/08
Males continue to grow in height until about the age of 27. Females until about 25.
Daniel Radcliffe is going to grow AT LEAST 2 more inches, possibly 3. It happened to my brother
Epona Cladach said on 5/Oct/08
Just got in from "Equus" at the Broadhurst on Broadway...YES he is that buff...his body looks great...it is not airbrushing....and YES, he is a good 5'4" or 5"...he was almost a full head shorter than both the actor who played his father and Richard Griffiths...and he was about an inch shorter than his female love interest, who was very petite. I was 12 feet from him. And he was AMAZING by the way...I'm almost looking forward to him wrapping up the Potter movies (of which I a fan) so he can move on to other things.
Anonymous said on 1/Oct/08
Unknown, you are kind of right, but, I'm telling you guys, look at new photos of Dan, he really seems to have grown in the past year! We'll definitely see when more photos of the cast come out, but I'm telling you, he looks taller and bigger.
Anonymous said on 30/Sep/08
Anon, that would put D-Rad at 5'2" or 5'3" and, if you believe he is that short, that's fine, but just remember that that would put Grint at about 5'4"/5'5" and, come one, he's not that short.