Add a Comment2425 comments
Average Guess (123 Votes)
6ft 3.3in (191.3cm)
patrick said on 29/Feb/08
More than that Dear Gonzalo! Stewart Granger was long listed 6'3 and looked so in many movies but he definitely was not shorter than 6'2, even "old"!
I saw in the bonus of Hondo, a story of Ward Bond, how
Gonzalo said on 28/Feb/08
I agree with Talker and anonymous, Wayne was at least 1`91 barefoot. Gammy61, your comments are hard to understand. Wayne walking on elevating ground? In what movie was that? I can buy the lifts rumour, although I have seen no evidence so far, but walking on elevating ground....That sounds crazy.
Yes, Wayne was 5 or 6 cms than Stewart Granger in North to Alaska. Granger was a tall man, 1
Anonymous said on 27/Feb/08
GUYS! John Wayne was at least 6'3 Barefoot. Ive watched to maney Wayne Movies and know without a doubt he was a tall man. Ive seen him in movies with normal footware. He was in a movie with Anthony Quinn. Quinn is listed at 6'2 and looked it to me. He and Wayne were standing next to each other and Wayne had him by at least 2 inches. He was 6'4 max or at least 6'3 no shorter.
talker said on 27/Feb/08
i saw "north to Alaska" recently,where Wayne looks a good 2" taller than St.Granger.I always thought Granger was 6'2" so that would make Wayne around the 6'4" mark like many people say and he was old there.Also,I saw "Pirrsburgh" where Wayne is young and is an inch taller than Randolph Scott.Scott always looked 6'3" to me.Since i'm one of the people who put Wayne around 6'3" i must say i'm having second thoughts now.BAsicaly what still bothers me is that Stewart looked taller in my mind in
patrick said on 26/Feb/08
Frankly, will due respect, I always wonder how some people can live in our world without hitting their head everywhere, wounding themselves in putting their shoes on or even simpler daily life things !
I have been so many times paying tribute to my favourite stars in front of the Mann
grammy61 said on 25/Feb/08
I have heard he was shorter than reported and always walked on elevated ground and after viewing his foot prints in Hollywood really started to wonder. If he had worn an 11" shoe why are his foot prints so small? Looks like they belong to a small child.
patrick said on 25/Feb/08
I agree with you paul but...I don't know what the heck you are taking about!
As far as I know, even the most stubborn people here never have imply such a stupidity!
paul douglas said on 22/Feb/08
What kind of idiot would say John Wayne was 5'6"? I'm 5'8" and Wayne was a hell
of a lot taller than me.
mike c said on 18/Feb/08
Gonzalo, Patrick. just viewed Hondo. Especially waited for the confrontation between Wayne and Arness. Well,boys, only a 2-3 inch diff. between the two as they stood face to face...Duke with boots and Arness with at least 1-2 inch heels.....love it! Do the math: The Duke with 2 inch boots, 6'6"; Arness with at least 1.5" heels....6'8+...it's there guys!...OH, I forgot, the Duke was wearing 6" lifts. Take care. Mike
patrick said on 18/Feb/08
Dear Mike, I already have it! That's why I can talk about it. I invite you to get to the special features and hope you will have the one about James Edward Grant: captivating! a lot of teaching stuff for sure.
Eager to read your comments Mike! Good to read you again "here", anyway!
mike c said on 16/Feb/08
Just bought Hondo at Barnes and Noble, Patrick. I'm sure you, Gonzalo, can purchase it on line from them....I've never seen the movie, but am looking forward to seeing it tonight. Take care, amigos. Mike
mike c said on 15/Feb/08
Hi Gonzalo& Patrick!! Saw a movie a few yrs.back with the Duke and Arness standing face to face in suits and dress shoes....can't remember the title..in fact, I wrote a post about it quite a while ago...you're both right, face to face, only 2-3 inch difference...Arness was 6'7"/Duke 6'4.5"..will write to both of you soon. Take care. Mike C ps someone out there must have a picture of Arness and Wayne..
patrick said on 14/Feb/08
Dear friend, Gonzalo: very hard to me to pick up a picture from a DVD! I just do not know how to do it if any possible!
Hondo was "off" for decades as were some 50ies' Hitchcok's movies.
quite easy to find it out by now and really worthwhile!
Good film and great actors!
Gonzalo said on 14/Feb/08
THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION, PATRICK. I HAVEN
patrick said on 12/Feb/08
I watched "Hondo" yesterday and it was obvious that he was very tall at the time.
There is a scene where he and James Arness confronted each other: there are exactly, I mean really precisely, two inches between maximum between them for James.
I actually, would be inclined to just see one inch if I did not know how tall was James, namely 6
patrick said on 17/Jan/08
"people curse when they run out of intelligent things to say": what could I add?
As for Cooper06, no way he can be related to the great Gary!
See you fella!
mike c said on 16/Jan/08
Hey guys, I didn't realize BillyBob had 2 brothers..triplets!!...it's amazing how all three cannot post without degrading, cursing, and just plain showing their ignorance. Stewart was 6'3" when he died....Wayne might have lost some height after the horrendous surgeries he had to endure, but he's just as tall as Jimmy or taller in the Shootist ( and they're both wearing boots). Patrick, you're right on! will write shortly. Gonzalo, just bought Dakota..Wayne with Mike Mazurki (6'5-6")..there's a scene with both of them face to face with dress shoes on..of course the triplets think lifts....I guess if their remote control had a pause button/slow button and they used a DVD, they might just see where our logic is. But, that would be too easy and just might burst their bubble...Gonzalo is also right, I bougth Donavan's Reef in Dec. and there is not doubt whatsoever Wayne was at least 2" taller than Marvin (6'2")...No offense meant Cooper06 (are you related to Gary Cooper?), but you just might have to learn how to read and use more intelligent language than just plain invectives!! You see, people curse when they run out of intelligent things to say!!!
patrick said on 16/Jan/08
You definitely give too many proves cooper06! Stop! Please!
What an argument! Wow,
When I think all that time lost just because not being put in front of your comment!
Mike c, Gonzalo and I are completely overwhelmed!
Do you really think it is enough to state
Gonzalo said on 16/Jan/08
I saw recently Donovan`s reef, made in 1963. Wayne looks 5-6 cms taller than Lee Marvin, who is listed here 1`88. Wayne is wearing sneakers. Where are the four-inch lifts in this pic? He also appears barefoot and doesn`t look 10 cms shorter.
Cooper06, if that is a fact, why are there no evidences?
cooper06 said on 15/Jan/08
Duke Wayne wore 4 inch lifts in the 60`s to look 6-4! That`s not an opinion, that`s not an stupid trash post, that`s a goddamn fact! He looked 6-4 in the 60s, didn`t he? No shorter, but also not particularly taller. And he STILL used 4 inch lifts. 6`4"- 4" inch lifts and we have.... oh my god! Yes, Wayne lost height in the early 60s and therefore used lifts but mark my words... He was NEVER six foot four inches tall.
glenn said on 10/Jan/08
i have a lost pic with howard and in dress shoes he was an inch taller than me.unless i was 5-7 then.which is possible.but howard has been listed at 5-9.
patrick said on 10/Jan/08
Catsman, I live in France where TV is saved only with US and British shows.
Some documentaries are, now and then , interesting because they always are foreign (mostly from the Anglo-Saxon countries!).
Cable delivers US movies which help but as far as I am concerned, TV is
clark said on 10/Jan/08
Ron Howard is closer to 5'8--maybe a hair under. Anson "Potsie" Weber was the tallest of the famous four-at almost 5'11. While Henry Winkler did the best to stretch out of his 5'6 and "1/2" inch frame, probably more like 5'5. Not to mention the motorcylce boots. Tom Bosley listed at 5'7 or so was just a tad bit shorter than his tv son, while Ralph Malph also calimed he was 5'11, but appeared shorter than Potsie. Scott Baio lean out at about 5'10 or so, and left all of them behind, except for Potsie. Not to mention that "Chachie" was always wearing white converse all-stars.
Bruno said on 9/Jan/08
John Wayne was a legend, At least 6 4 in his hey day.
Catsman said on 9/Jan/08
MIke C - regarding your December 29th post, I haven't seen The Quiet Man yet but I will when it comes on next. Was it on over Christmas? I live in England and content myself with the 5 regular analogue channels (the limted bandwidth given to the digital channels really ruins a lot of programs - I guess they want us all to pay for HD) so I'll sit tight until it comes on again. Happy New Year!
patrick said on 9/Jan/08
CLARK: why are you telling me I have to read mike c "more carefully"? I am proud to claim I consider him as a friend and I say he is right. What you say is respectable but thinking that John Wayne
clark said on 8/Jan/08
Patrick: you need to read a bit more careful. Mike C was saying that Wayne appeared taller. And in some instances he does, but remember the Duke was the star, and your jaw would drop if you could see what there demands are before filming a movie. I have the utmost respect for John Wayne, but Hollywood is about allusion, and keeping heroes-- always looking like heroes. In the early days of Tom Selleck-- he was kept out of certain pictures because he towered over the "stars."
The photo at the academy awards show Jimmy A lil bit taller than the "Duke,"
and I have always thought Jimmy Stewart's build very similar to Pierce Brosnan, and John Wayne had the massive shoulders that can take the appearance of height away. Either way, may they both rest in peace.
glenn said on 7/Jan/08
ron howard is 5-9.
glenn said on 7/Jan/08
makes sense mike b.i just cant understand how a 6-3 or 6-4.5(which i have read back in the day) guy would wear lifts in the first place.some say he was 6ft.5.i think its clear he was at least 6-3,and very possibly 6-4.im no wayne expert however.he kinda reminds me of steven seagal on how seagal can look 6-5 to me,and me trying to figure out how much its in the boots.
patrick said on 7/Jan/08
Once more, mike c is right: Jimmy Stewart made only two movies with the Duke.
In the first one,
clark said on 7/Jan/08
Funny I saw early pics of the Duke, and I saw a wee bit of Conan O Brien. Then again, they are both of Irish decent, and tall.
mike c said on 6/Jan/08
Clark,Scott B, in the Shootist, when Wayne and Stewart are walking out of his office you get a clear look at both of them and their boots....hit the pause button a few times so they go in slow motion.....Wayne is taller. Appreciate your opinion.
mike c said on 6/Jan/08
Buttkis...hmm. very original. Krhm? Don't know what that means, but I'm sure if must be a compliment....Happy New Year BillyBob.
Scott B. said on 6/Jan/08
Even if John Wayne wore lifts, I beleive he was 6'3 barefoot. He had a habit of slouching when in scenes with Jimmy Stewart. I have seen Wayne in a movie with Anthony Quinn who is listed at 6'1 in his prime. Wayne and Quinn were wearing normal footware and Wayne was taller than Quinn by 2 inches. John Wayne was 6'3 Barefoot. Like I said before watch the Movie the Shootist. There is a scene where he is Barefoot with Ron Howard. Howard being 5'8, 5'10 in Boots was 5 or 6 inches shorter than Wayne. Glenn...What do you think?
clark said on 6/Jan/08
Jimmy Stewart always appeared taller than Wayne,and Jimmy was listed at 6'3 1/2...
mike c said on 4/Jan/08
BillyBob...I know your're trying, but you're not getting better. I see neither your eyesight nor your intellgence has improved..so write away as I'm just going to delete what you scribble... as I do with all the other junkmail I read.
mike c said on 3/Jan/08
Editor Rob, your dad sounds like a very intelligent man....one with very good taste and judgement, I might add.....good for him. mike c
mike c said on 2/Jan/08
Hey Gonzalo, no offense taken...you're a good man and I respect you as I do Patrick....I guess I missed a post or two as I thought Patrick lived in the Good Ol' USA..no matter, I still respect him and I think he's very intelligent, but above all, very insightful..he and you exhibit a lot of common sense when it comes to posting comments about the Duke....you're both well read and have definitely done your homework. Anyway, Happy New Year to you, and all of the Duke's fans....ps, Patrick, if you want, contact Gonzalo and he'll give you my address..thanks also, Ed. Rob....this is the best site of all....mike c
Gonzalo said on 2/Jan/08
Hi, Patrick. I hope not to offense Mike C and other americans saying that I would rather live in Paris than in the US. I love the US but I feel strongly European and I specially love France and Paris.
I hope you`re doing Ok Patrick cause you sounded a bit blue in your last post. I
patrick said on 2/Jan/08
My friends, I am SOOO touched with your words, words I insist to share, as Gonzalo does, with our mutual host: Ed.Rob without whom we never could have been able to communicate!
I want to believe that our mutual love for the Duke actually is the proof of something else, of something higher than just
Gonzalo said on 2/Jan/08
Happy new year to everyone, especially Mike C, Patrick and editor Rob! Patrick, it would be a pleasure to meet you, as well as Mike C. Mike and I know each other a little more, since we write each other by e-mail. You live in France, don
mike c said on 31/Dec/07
Great to read you again, Patrick. I was getting worried about you and almost wrote Gonzalo to see if he knew why you weren't contributing.....Gonzalo and I know each other's identity.....he's in Spain and I'm in New Jersey..eastern USA..the best country in the world albeit with many flaws, but it still allows me to post what I want....and millions of people flock here, illegally and legally, year after year...I wonder why? Gonzalo is a gentleman, a young one at that. He's a proud father and, I can sense, a man that loves his family. You appear to exhibit similar qualities though a "tad" older. The Duke was indeed a flawed man, yet his heart and love for life, his country, his children are enviable...he's one of my heroes and the more I research him, the more I can identify with him...though I'm only 5'6" and have only 2 beautiful daughters....his love for his children, his dedication to his art, and yes, he was indeed a great actor....he was a natural...just watch him in action...really watch him as he speaks and totally convinces you he is the man he's portraying on the screen. I kown Gonzalo,a true Duke fan, will wholeheartedly agree. Scroll down, Patrick, and view his album..it's getting to be quite an eye-opener for all the "fans" that still insist Wayne was at best 6'tall....It would indeed be great if we could have a glass of wine/beer together in memory of the Duke....who knows, maybe I live in the same town you do...maybe we can exchange e-mail addresses soon....if only to share pics and chat about our mutual friend....Happy New Year to you, your family, and of course, Gonzalo.and all the other Duke fans..mike c
patrick said on 31/Dec/07
Guys: "I'm back!" I was far from any civilization so couldn
mike c said on 29/Dec/07
Scott, from my Oct 8 post: Catsman, if you indeed saw The Quiet Man, maybe you missed three important scenes. The one with Victor McLaglen in the widow's home where the Duke haggles for his father's property. They're face to face, you get a great shot of the shoes....if you see 4" heels/lifts you are definitely in denial. Earlier in the movie when he's being driven to his hometown in a horse and buggie, you get a good look at the shoes he wears throughout the movie....again, the 4" lifts are no where to be scene.....and the best shot of all, when he's standing in the doorway of his cottage and his wife has gone AWOL, he's barefoot...he's taller than the doorway....I know, they purposely built the cottage to make his look tall....hope you can buy or rent The Quiet Man...mike c
Scott said on 29/Dec/07
I don't know why certain people insist that John Wayne was under 6'2. I have watched several of his movies and it is CLEAR he was at least 6'3 barefoot. In his last movie the Shootist, there was a scene where Wayne was Barefoot and Ron Howard had Boots on and Wayne still was at least 6 inches taller. He was NEVER below 6'2.
chris said on 25/Dec/07
John Wayne was definately a solid 6'4 1/2, maybe even 6'5" in his earlier years leading up to the 50s. I think he was 6'4 after the mid 50s though.
Gonzalo said on 20/Dec/07
Chuck`s opinions could be respectful but he mixed them with insults and that absurd statement that he saw John Wayne barefoot. He lost all credibility saying that. And once again he showed no evidence.
Filiz Navidad Mike c
mike c said on 19/Dec/07
Hey Gonzalo! Like your Hudson quote! Of course, you know, we're both wrong. Hudson hated the Duke....that's what I've heard.....I saw the Undefeated again and there just wasn't any chemistry between the giant Hudson and the tiny Duke....go figure!!!
Gonzalo said on 19/Dec/07
Glenn said once a sentence that I liked and I want to borrow it now and dedicate it to Chuck: `go get some friends`.
mike c said on 18/Dec/07
Chuck sounds like Billy Bob's twin!...from John Wayne, The Man Behind the Myth, pages 290-291:the Duke states...." We had Rock Hudson, one of the most professional guys I ever worked with" When asked about Rock, the Duke replies, "He's a homosexual? Yes, I know. Who the hell cares if he's queer? The man plays great chess. We had many a game up there in Durango. And what a good-looking man. I admit, I couldn't understand how a guy with those looks and that build and the ..manly way he had about him could have been a homosexual, but it never bothered me. Life's too short. It wasn't like some of his type who go around saying, 'Poor me, I'm discriminated against.' He just got on with his life in private, and I never cared to know about it. All I cared about was he was on the set on time every day, and at the end of the day he'd say, 'Care for a little chess, Duke?' and I'd say, 'You wanna get beat again?'"
The author then quotes Hudson who states, "I was grateful to Duke Wayne because my career was going down the toilet at that time"......."John Wayne was then the Hollywood legend, and I was on screen with him, The guy is an angel. He saved my life back then when no other filmaker wanted to know me." The author of the book is Michael Munn.2003 New American Library. I provide This info just in case Chuck and his macho twin, Billy, can read. It's obvious their vision and their ability to understand height is on the wane...5'11.5" my ass!
Gonzalo said on 17/Dec/07
Happy Christmas for everyone and happy 2007. Thanks for your comments, MikeC. It is great to have you on board. I hope to find some time this holidays (if I finally get any ) to watch a John Wayne movie. I want John Wayne `s lift shoes for Christmas!
mike c said on 16/Dec/07
obviously, I meant to write "their homework" instead of "they're homework"...
mike c said on 15/Dec/07
Gonzalo, Patrick, Ed. Rob. Glenn, and all of John Wayne's fans...Happy Holidays and a healthy New Year.....This IS the best site of all and I enjoy reading all the comments, even when they're written after a night of drinking..only kidding..Patrick, you and Gonzalo are the best...except for maybe the contributors who still write without doing they're homework....It makes my day!!
patrick said on 12/Dec/07
Mike c, I do love too to read what you, Gonzalo and all the
Gonzalo said on 12/Dec/07
Hi, guys. In The Billy Wilder film Spirit of Saint Louis James Stewart (who plays Lindbergh) says something about his height and from what I remembered it was around 6`3. Mike C, I can add the pic with Carnera. It is a good one. I remember reading years ago that Carnera was the tallest boxer at around 2 meters. I see now that it was a bit less thatn that, around 1`97.
mike c said on 11/Dec/07
AS, your site for Carnera is great! I love the Wayne pic...he's certainly not dwarfed by Primo...both in suits, except maybe, just maybe, the Duke is wearing boots with 4" lifts....LOL...You've got to love Google....I'm adding this photo to my album...how about it, Gonzalo? Patick, go the Lindberg site and scroll down to the photo of Lindberg in a pilot's hat....compare to the AS photo...maybe days without shaving, no sleep, no sex, can have that affect on a man....I'm reading that Lindberg was max 6'2", not 6'4" and maybe that's why we're confused..we're expecting a much taller man....take care guys. love reading what you write.
patrick said on 11/Dec/07
Be that as it may, That is Primo and he definitely was huge with a giantlike physique.
I am 100% sure it is not Lindbergh on the pic, absolutely sure! He was taller and above all, even later, very handsome. He looked like Patrick Mc Goohan but in more "German" (Hardy Kruger way). I am a painting fan (mainly classic one) and a good artist myself. No way it is Charles Lindbergh!
Anyway, that is interesting since we so have the opportunity to talk about our dear Duke!
I just read, while writing, your mike c last comment and saw your photos: Lindbergh looks, for me, the same any which pic it is, and he looks even old, very handsome!
Frankly, unless this pic with Primo is particularly disadvantageous for "the other", I can buy such a funny face being that great pilot's one!
I doubt Colin Farrell or Pitt or Clooney will ever generate such a discussion in 30 years!
said on 10/Dec/07
Patrick, go to the site below...very different looking Lindberg...now, I'm getting curious. Mike CClick Here
mike c said on 10/Dec/07
Patrick, I'm having a problem with the Lindbergh photo...no doubt whatsoever it's Primo (all 6'5"-6" of him), but I always saw Lindbergh as being more handsome/stately...the guy in the pic looks like a poor excuse for a look
a-like...maybe we're wrong....Primo had a habit of dwarfing everyone..except Wayne. Let me do some research. Maybe Gonzalo has some pics...take care. Great to hear from you. What do you think, Gonzalo? Mike C
said on 10/Dec/07
Thank you for the comments.
Patrick, from time to time interesting photos will pop up on personal webpages. Apart from that theres always google/yahoo images! lol
As to the "lindbergh" photo- I too was having a difficult time figuring out the veracity of it. The post could have been better phrased "with *supposedly* Charles Lindbergh, usually cited as 6'4"".
The man definitely looks "off" for lindbergh. The face is more rounded and the chin more prominent than typical of Lindbergh. However, most photos of him on the net are circa 1927, whereas this one could be 5-10 yrs later. The jacket and helmet certainly don't help!
The photos were pulled from this site:Click Here
check the ones with Chaplin and the three Stooges! I almost have to wonder if Primo, as he had acromeglia, may have shrunk a bit too. I definitely agree JT that he looked less heavy in later years.
I'd really like to see Rob add Primo Carnera as there are many photos floating around of him with older celebrities.
patrick said on 10/Dec/07
Oh sorry mike C! I understand now: that is Red Skelton for sure (I thought you talked about the other pic with the "strange" Lindbergh!
By the way, what do you think?
patrick said on 10/Dec/07
AS, I love your pics (where did you dig them up?)but...are you sure that is Lindbergh on the first one? I really do not recognize him at all! This guy is ugly while Lindbergh had an "actorlike physique"!
Yet, I do not recognize Red Skelton either!!!
Jason said on 10/Dec/07
Was Primo 100% ethnic Italian? Wondering because I think Sequals is along the Italian/Slovenian border or nearly.
mike c said on 8/Dec/07
AS, ps....I think that's Red Skelton in the first pic...he was 6'2" according to what I've read over the years. mike c
JT said on 8/Dec/07
Nice pic AS. Carnera was supposedly measured at 6'5 3/4". IIRC, he weighed around 260-270 lbs. when he boxed (1930s) but was thinner when he wrestled later on in his life. That pic looks like from the 1950s.
mike c said on 8/Dec/07
Nice pics. AS...glad you're on board...I'd put Wayne at minimum 6'4"+ in the first pic. with Carnera....see below:
(the "Ambling Alp")
BORN October 26 1906; Sequals, Italy
DIED June 29 1967; Sequals, Italy
HEIGHT 6-5 3/4
WEIGHT 238-284 lbs
MANAGERS Leon See, Frank Churchill, Billy Duffy, Walter Friedman
RECORD 89-15-0 (71 KO, 1 ND) Mike C
said on 7/Dec/07
John Wayne had a surprisingly large presence. Check out this pic of him with Primo Carnera in the background:Click Here
Now, see this one of the supposedly 6'4 Charles Lindbergh with PrimoClick Here
We can't see the shoes and the perspectives are different, but Wayne certainly doesn't look dwarved. He looks significantly larger than Lindbergh, of similar height.
mike c said on 6/Dec/07
Kid, when you read this, do yourself a favor and scroll down......
Kid-Icarus said on 6/Dec/07
Many sites i've read said that he was 6'4 1/2" It this possible?
patrick said on 28/Nov/07
I know you did not AAAA, don't worry; I just added my own feeling about that great man who turned out to be a great actor, "furthermore"!
You're right about "pride"; I don't confess it but I am, deep down, quite proud to look pretty young at 55 without doing anything for that but working out; gently, everysay (but week ends!) and feeding simply and safely.
I am not tall at all (play on words)but I would lie in claiming I am not aware that I very rarely meet peopleas I stayed up to now. Why saying that? Just to explain how I can understand you and people proud, while being modest and really humble that apart, of what they are! I pity people who "have the stuff" of being proud! Everybody,even hugly, short, fat or whatever, should have something to be proud of. That is the lesson (one of them) I always withdrew from the Tod Borwning's masterpiece "Freaks".
What do you think?
Scott B. said on 28/Nov/07
Robert Mitchum said he was kidding about Wayne wearing lifts. Wayne was at least 6'3.
AAAA said on 27/Nov/07
I disn't mean he was ugly in anyway, just that the inscription he requested makes me think he valued his physical presence more than his appearence, which is pretty unique. People are so vain about preserving or improving their looks they will spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on surgery. If you prided yourself on your physical presence and had a hard time leeting thats go, then is it really strange he would wear lifts at an old age to hold on to the power of his youth... I think not. Hell, I'd hate to pull an eastwood and be 5'11 when I am old. Not that height is the end all be all but I really enjoy being 6'2. I'm sure Wayne was proud of his 6'4 size as well.
patrick said on 27/Nov/07
I agree with you AAAA, as usual but I would say I NEVER found him ugly in any way! On the contrary, he was handsome and if you watch his early movies up to mid 40ies, he was very "so". All the women I heard talking about him, all of them said the same: "he was a beautiful man". His look, his eyes were incredible. My wife who is much younger than I am, is always, I mean always, amazed when seeing him, whatever age he is. The way his head was slightly swaying, at the end of a long and huge trunklike neck, was unique.
But I repeat, check out the old movies he was on and you will see how handsome he was!
In "in harm's way", he as tall as the huge George Kennedy and taller than the tall and bulky Tom Tryon.
Jason said on 27/Nov/07
patrick says on 22/Nov/07
''Jason, depending the age: 220 very young, around 30, certainly but minimum 265 at 60!
This man had huge limbs and hands! His neck as his shoulders were "tree like"!
A natural overproportioned lumberjacked American!''
Yeah, he was bigger when he was oldish.
AAAA said on 26/Nov/07
I think the big lifts came in in the end. While a powerful man, he wasn't particulary dashingly handsome. I remeber reading that He requested his tombstone read "Feo, Fuerte y Formal", a Spanish epitaph meaning "ugly, strong and serious. I think he took great pride in his hulking physical stature, and when it began to diminish, he tried to compinsate. I don't want to shrink, so I don't blame him. Plus...he is JOHN FREAKING WAYNE, the epitome of american masculinity and the icon of a generation.
patrick said on 26/Nov/07
First "Happy Thanksgiving!" to you, all of you mike c, Gonzalo, Da Man and Viper and the others. That is important.
Then, I am watching "in harm's way" and the Duke looks not only very tall but as a tank. It really seems that the ship is too small for him and bumps into every corner of "her" (the ship).
You know, I work in a hospital and see often people having ribs removed because of cancer as would undergo John Wayne in 1964. All of those who went thru that seem have been shrinking by ten inches! That is remarkable!
I always have been amazed how the Duke recovered quickly after he got such an important surgery. Even very young, (I was 11 or so), I remember how he looked to me as
Gonzalo said on 26/Nov/07
THe John Wayne album has new entries, courtesy of Mike C. You can see Wayne as tall as tiny Rock Hudson. Let
Anonymous said on 25/Nov/07
no way...Duke was maybe 6'2....maybe...look at I Love Lucy with him in it...he would tower over Desi and Lucy..and he certainly didn't not...probably wore boots most of the time
mike c. said on 22/Nov/07
Patrick, Gonzalo, Happy Thanksgiving! The Duke was indeed 300 pounds..that's why he was able to hop unto a horse from a running start while his co-actors needed a springboard...in particular, Douglas...and by the way, Wayne was 10 yrs. his senior..but, other than that silly feat, the Duke could hardly walk in his almost 5-6 inch lifts..boy, are Billy Bob et. al. ever so correct!
How ever could we have made so big a mistake to think that the Duke was at most 250lbs. and 6'4"!! I guess there' no accounting for common sense...Gonzalo, the scan will follow in a day or 2....cuidate/take care Patrick.
patrick said on 22/Nov/07
Jason, depending the age: 220 very young, around 30, certainly but minimum 265 at 60!
This man had huge limbs and hands! His neck as his shoulders were "tree like"!
A natural overproportioned lumberjacked American!
Jason said on 21/Nov/07
John Wayne nearly 300lbs?!?! He was 220...
mike c said on 21/Nov/07
Da Man,you took the words out of my mouth. Thank you.
Da Man said on 21/Nov/07
For some odd reason, I don't believe Billy Bob's personal claims. Why is that everyone on the internet is a highly trained fighter? Internet bad asses, gotta love 'em.
patrick said on 21/Nov/07
PLEASE Gonzalo, mike c, I forgot to ask you to get to the Henry Fonda page: you will see that "n...ty" people work also there!
patrick said on 21/Nov/07
Mike c, Gonzalo, I did not want to mix up my answers; this one is dedicated to both of you. I wonder where "anyone" could see Charlton Heston taller than the Duke and mike c, Gonzalo, by the way, your B.Bob comments are masterpieces in their conciseness I must confess I am not able to have and humour I fortunately, think I do have!
patrick said on 21/Nov/07
Mr Billy Bob, do you know what the word "boastful" or "braggart" mean? If so -you DON'T- you have the excuse of being a kid. A grown up does not talk about himself that way.
Admitting you are what you claim, you destroy the wonderful image you have of yourself first in depicting it so and second, in using it to reduce such a man as John Wayne was.
As I said it many times here: easy to talk behind a keyboard all the more reason about a DEAD man!
How tall, boxer,
Gonzalo said on 21/Nov/07
Well, he doesn
Gonzalo said on 21/Nov/07
Billy Bob, show us that pic of Wayne and Heston, please. And get back to your medication
mike c said on 20/Nov/07
Gonzalo, great to hear from you. Will try to scan the Mike Mazurki pic with the Duke...he's also in Donavan's Reef..he and Wayne were very good friends. Take care, amigo. Mike C. ps, thank you Patrick. Now, I wonder where Billy Bob is going to find an outstanding boxer?
mike c said on 20/Nov/07
Billy Bob, you're a legend in your own mind.
Billy Bob said on 20/Nov/07
Well! Yesterday I saw a pic where Wayne was with the young Chuck Heston in the early 50`s. The 6ft 3 Heston was only 2 inches taller. No more. There`s too much proof, gentleman... Barefoot John Michael Wayne was 6`1" and weighted nearly 300 pounds!
And you`re talking about "he could kick our ass" You mean physically in a one on one fight?
Lister mister, Im 6-3, 200 well-built pounds, and Im a boxer. Wayne wasn`t taller, just fatter. And Wayne might have been powerful but I dont know how does that help against a outstanding boxer?
I know you like Wayne. I like some of his movies too! My favourite is definitely Wild Bunch!
Sabrina said on 20/Nov/07
It is true and many sources quote he wore lifts to make him appear taller. This may seem strange as the man was clearly already a good 6'2 minimum. However it was an image he was upholding. Bear in mind with age and weight gain his height could appear less upto 1 to 2 inches easily, especially as a bear belly will cause more curvature in the spine meaning it is less straight. Any person can experience days when they look shorter especially if slouching excessivley or poor posture causing muscles to tighten which can make you appear shorter. Also bad health and bone density loss as age progresses take inches of your height. Bottom line of it this man was clearly over 6ft, and without question no shorter than 6'2, and I would ere closer to the 6'3 and 6'4. Whether he was 6'2, 6'3 or 6'4 does not matter he was larger than life, the Duke, he has left us with films that are unforgettable, Hollywood today will never be able to match the stars of those days in talent, style, charisma and grace.
Gonzalo said on 20/Nov/07
Thanks for your comments Mike C, very interesting. Mike Mazurski was huge. Watch "The unconquered" to see how tall he was. It is also a very good movie.
Mike, I hope to upload this week the pics you have sent me. Could you scan the pic of Duke and Mazurski?
Was it Goebbles the one who said that a lied told many times becomes truth? Maybe that
patrick said on 20/Nov/07
Ah ah! What a fun mike c! I positively love that way you use to tell stories I feel so close to!
By the way, Monument Valley is my very favourite place! I can and I wish I could, stay there for ever without never feeling like drinking nothing but water or soda! How lucky were those guys to earn money (a lot) in such gorgeous, beautiful and magical places!
I never considered the Duke as I did with Ward Bond. The Duke was "a Duke", as Ellington was! Wayne had very much of an aristocrat and that is clearly visible in public meetings or when interviewed
He had manners and was always humble and very delicate, precise in his way of speaking, with
patrick said on 19/Nov/07
I love when people are so "modest" and respectful with dead ones! I positively love that! Such a pity...
The way we talk or write about "others" shows who we are better than any other analysis.
I consider despising people as "small" (not necessarily in height) and full of hate for celebrities, wanting always reduce them as a vengeance.
Nothing to add. I wish I was before "them" and not behind my keyboard.
mike c said on 18/Nov/07
Wow, Billy Bob, you've truly done your homework...!
Billy Bob said on 18/Nov/07
Yep. Wayne was 6-1 + 3-4-inch lifts. That`s what everyone said when they worked with him! John Wayne was tallish fatty.
patrick said on 12/Nov/07
Thanks a lot once more for so much warm words mike c.
I re watched Rio Bravo yesterday for probably at least the 30th time and always under its charm as if it was the first!
What an alchemy! Were those guys actors? It sounds they were living the action, deeply, without the slightest impression of fake emotion, feeling!
Everybody seems being carried away with a
mike c said on 9/Nov/07
Patrick, I guess the author wanted to highlight that Wayne, in spite of his big frame and 10 yrs. on Kirk, was still in great shape....Loved Kirk and Mitchum...as always, nice to hear from you. I've sent Gonzalo some vintage Wayne pics. perhaps he'll have time to post them. If he does, look carefully at the Hudson/Wayne photo...Take care. Mike C
patrick said on 9/Nov/07
I enjoyed it mike c: thanks a lot!
I just would say the author was not really fair concerning my other friend Kirk when mentionning "he needed a trampoline". Please, watch again this movie and you just cannot be nothing but impressed with "Kirk Douglas" incredible acrobatic display!
Sure he used a trampoline not to ride his horse but to jump over him and according to how he wanted to do it!
The rest is nice, very nice and a good prophetic testimony (about he will act until death)!
mike c said on 7/Nov/07
Enjoy Patrick, Gonzalo, et.al..from Time June 9, 1967....
"The visitor at Fort Benning, Ga., stirred as much excitement as if he were the Army Chief of Staff, or at least Cassius Clay getting into khakis. But the commanding and familiar figure that strode past the barracks was dressed in civvies. The only martial markings were a brass wire on his right wrist, symbolizing his initiation into a Montagnard unit in Viet Nam and, on his other wrist, a watch crystal worn inward, combat style, to which was attached a gold tag with name and address, presumably to notify next of kin if anything happened to the bearer. The tag read: JOHN WAYNE.
Just two days before, "Duke" Wayne had celebrated his 60th birthday at the premiere of his 162nd picture, The War Wagon, in Arlington, Texas. Now he was working at Benning without rest through the long Memorial Day weekend to stake out No. 163, The Green Berets. He would prefer to shoot the film in Viet Nam. "But if you start shooting blanks over there," he says, "they might start shooting back." Duke knows. Last year, while touring a Marine encampment for the U.S.O., he heard the crack of Viet Cong snipers' rifles. "They were so far away," sniffs Wayne, "I didn't stop signing autographs." The bullets, in fact, tore up the turf within 17 yards of him.
Kicking "Big C." Thirty-eight years of such energy, courage and authority have made John Wayne the greatest moneymaker in movie history: the gross comes to nearly $400 million. He is still the hero by Hemingway out of Hollywood, the he-man's he-man and the she-fan's idol. He talks and looks as tough as ever, though it was less than three years ago that he lost a lung while, as he put it, "kicking the Big C (cancer)."
Give or take some creases over the eyes, the huge, leathery face has hardly changed. Nor have the jutting jaw, the laconic grin, the squinting eyes blue as the big sky. The shoulders on his rangy (6 ft. 4 in.) frame still seem persuasive enough to get his football scholarship to Southern Cal renewed. He still looks born to the saddle; in The War Wagon, he mounted his horse with his own steam, while Co-Star Kirk Douglas, ten years younger, had to leap aboard his mount with the help of an unseen trampoline. The only perceptible indications of Wayne's years are a bit more heft around the middle and the hairpiece he wears on the set to mask a thinning pate.
Everything else is the original goods. Among them is the same sort of part Wayne has been playing since 1929 with the same acting style that his studio biography calls "naturalistic." "In my acting," he says, "I have to identify with something in the character. The big tough boy on the side of right
mike c said on 7/Nov/07
Guys, from Time magazine..June 9, 1967: "Give or take some creases over the eyes, the huge leathery face has hardly changed. Nor have the jutting jaw, the laconic grin, the squinting eyes as blue as the big sky....The shoulders on his rangy 6'4" frame still look persuasive...He still looks born to the saddle..."
said on 7/Nov/07
I have uploaded new pics, courtesy of Mike C. I hope you enjoy it. Wayne looks taller than McLaglen. You can also see Wayne`s shoes. No lifts insideClick Here
mike c said on 6/Nov/07
Russ, I know that Gonzalo was being facetious. He was playing with the words to make a very strong point. He spoke "tongue in cheek" amd I applaud him for it. I just e-mailed him more of the Quiet Man photos and hope he'll share them with you. Where we does not agree, ( and in a very respectful manner I should add) is that the Duke was ever 6'4.5"...I don't think Gonzalo believes he was...and I truly respect his opinion and maybe he's right....who cares. This site is all in fun, albeit with some stats and research along the way..for me, as for Gonzalo and Patrick, the Duke was very tall.
Gonzalo said on 6/Nov/07
Hi, Russ. I was trying to be ironical showing documents in which Wayne looks at least 1`90 (around 6`3).
This is getting repetitious: Wayne was a very tall man, at least 1`90 if not taller
Russ said on 6/Nov/07
Gonzalo- Back on Oct 18th, you posted some old photos of John Wayne and commented that Wayne "should be downgraded immediately". In all 3 photos, John Wayne is considerably taller than everyone else, especially the photo where he is standing among several women. And look at the 3rd photo. He makes all the other men standing near him look like dwarfs. Some of your comments just don't make sense. You can't fake that big of a difference in height, even if he "was" wearing lifts. I truly believe that John Wayne was a good 6'3" in his older days and wore lifts anyway, just to sustain his image. Also, I've seen comments from people who say that Wayne looked short in his very early films. I don't think so. He always looked tall and lean. You can tell just by looking at his stature that he was tall. Long torso, long legs, smallish head compared to the body. Again, even if Wayne often wore lifts (which I don't deny), he was still a big, tall man even without them.
mike c said on 5/Nov/07
Thank you, Patrick. Everytime I watch a Wayne movie I focus on a particular actor. The last time I watch the Shootist, I focused on Steward and his height next to Wayne and what each was wearing..same thing with the Quiet Man...focused on the shoes the Duke was wearing and his height when face to face with Victor McLaglen...take care, Mike C
mike c said on 5/Nov/07
Joshua, you're right..the Duke was over 6'4+" in his early days, maybe up to the 50's, but we're having fun with the debate. Mike C
patrick said on 5/Nov/07
Welcome on behalf of me too clint (nice name!) and mike c, you once again "removed the words from my mouth"
mike c said on 4/Nov/07
Good observation, Clint. Welcome on board. I saw the Shootist again and watched carefully the scenes between Jimmy and John.....the Duke was taller, abeit not much, but with all his health problems,it's understandable. I have seen the Quiet Man at least 6 times, the uncut version and he was indeed 6'4"+ compared to the brut McLaglen....It's amazing what people see when they're convinced they're right and without any research at that. Just look at the great photo of the Duke with President Reagan and Frank Sinatra that my buddy Gonzalo sent at least twice...yeah, 6'2" or less! give me a break.
Joshua said on 4/Nov/07
Well in the 60s he used lifts to be that 6-4.... Well I guess with a great posture in his youth he might have been 6ft 4
clint said on 3/Nov/07
The duke claimed to be 6ft 4 and a half many times through his career and seemed a bit taller than 6ft 3 james stewart. Even in his final film the shootist he seemed a solid 6ft 4.
patrick said on 2/Nov/07
First Gonzalo is right, once more: repeating what he writes would be "copying him": he indeed appeared many times bare foot and that's true, appeared (not just "looked")very tall. We long discussed here about "proportions". A 6'1 man would have other proportions unless being kind of "monstrous"; Even David Duchovny who looks taller than he is (even for those who are meeting him) could not look so tall.
Besides, have you ever tried, just for the fun of it, to "enhance" your height in using lifts? Remember the sickness of soles used in films like Superman returns just to allow Brandon Routh not to break his foot or to look like a "high heeling" woman!
That is yet very simple: growing needs to have one's heel liftet up but until a certain level; look at the shoes suggested here to help you to get 4 inches! That is the real Frankenstein stilt-boots John is supposed to wear!
Gonzalo said on 31/Oct/07
I have read that quote myself. Mitchum talked about four inch lifts. That
Gene C said on 31/Oct/07
Mitchum's remark about Duke comes from an Esquire article on Bob from around the time of "The Winds of War." His comment was made with some affection, it should be pointed out. Again, I am not saying Duke was a short man, or less than 6'2" even, I am just repeating what many with far more actual evidence have said, that he enhanced his size with lifts (check out the boots in the famous photo of Dean Martin and Ricky Nelson and Wayne publicizing "Rio Bravo") and the largest cowboy hats known to mankind. Duke understood his legend, and sought to maximize it however he could.
patrick said on 31/Oct/07
No mike c! You don't know? John Wayne was in fact, the "other" identity of Mickey Rooney. So, I am happy since so, he's still alive but, as you and Gonzalo can now, finally have to bend to the unquestionable proof I thereby giving to you now: John Wayne was a tall...dwarf!
So, please, both of you, do abide by the new rules: everything which is absurd and against the slightest common sense, let's say, an "oyster's common sense", becomes "the truth" and a proof by itself.
I think that, after all, Joan Von Ark would not be so sure to save her life nowadays!
You know my friends, I am NO gentleman as mike and you, Gonzalo are. My blood has a low boiling point before, let's be polite, "bad faith" and stubbornness I hardly put up with in my ordinary life.
Sorry for those who will feel
mike c said on 30/Oct/07
Well said, Gonzalo. It's amazing what people say without any proof. I recently saw an oldie with the Duke and Roy Rogers. Roy was 6'tall in his prime. In the movie, he was about 30 yrs and the Duke about 5-6 yrs. older. They're walking side by side, both wearing boots with heels, and the Duke literally towers over Roy....but, alas, that is the magic of the camera and, in reality, the Duke was the same height as Roy...OK...George Kennedy 6'4.5" (In Harm's Way) in combat boots standing face to face with Wayne...no three inch (ridiculous!!) sole/heeled shoes in sight..in fact, if you use the pause button as they are walking towards the plane you can clearly see the shoes and the boots. But, Gonzalo, why bother with that..you see, my friend, using that evidence puts a wrench in the 6'1-2" theory and we just can't have that. Love what you and Patrick write...what a shame that only a couple of us fans have the ability scroll down and download the pic of Wayne, Eastwook Hudson, Steward, Marvin, Borgnine (Sp?) etc. Yes, very very short Wayne. Give me a break! Next time I'll write what Wayne said about the lifts...But, guys, you just might have to buy the book...Cuidate, Mike
Gonzalo said on 30/Oct/07
I wrote this on July 12th and I still believe it.
After all this time discussing about Wayne`s height I haven
Viper said on 30/Oct/07
A 6-1 John Wayne. I think I could buy that. Though I still think he was 6-2, maybe 6-2 1/2.
kevint said on 29/Oct/07
Billy Bob: Sounds about right. I would guess based on looking at many movie stills that the youthful Wayne was about 6'1.5"-6'2", and the elder Wayne was 6'1", tops. He almost never wore flat shoes and his size was always played up, much the same way Arnold Schwarzenegger's biceps were always pumped up and oiled onscreen. Wayne was a tall and well-built man, but no way was he 6'4", no matter what his publicity said.
Patrick: Sorry, you're wrong. There are lots of stills from his pre-Stagecoach days when Wayne does NOT tower over other actors, but looks about the same size. I've seen several shots from Wayne's military pictures where other actors appear taller. As for later pictures, there are loads of photos where James Stewart appears onscreen with Wayne, and looks taller. Stewart was 6'3".
I don't think Wayne wore lifts. He wore platform-heeled cowboy boots in all his western pictures--really *thick* ones, around three inches. These can be seen clearly in old photos...if you know a lot about cowboy boots, you should look at the photos. A good source is "The Complete Films of John Wayne", by Mark Ricci, Boris Zmijewsky, and Steve Zmijewsky. Lots of revealing photos of his bootwear in there.
He looked larger than life because he was a great actor!
patrick said on 29/Oct/07
Gene C: so you find J.Wayne not looking particularly tall in his early movies? What is "tall" for you? 6'7? Because I have tens of those 30ies movies and he ALWAYS looks very tall and above all, much taller than everybody else!
What "Frankenstein" boots are you talking about? That is typically what I call bad faith because his boots are very often visible in his movies (shoes as well) and you can take your time in watching them carefully in the DVD's opening sequence of the documentary "about Chisum". I wear cow boys boots for 42 years now and I can tell you everything about them: Mexican, Texan, "fashioned" etc. I saw several pairs of his boots in museums and at WB studios: if you find "ridiculous" his boots, you simply don't like them! Gary Cooper wore exactely the same kind of boots, notably in the 30ies!
As for Bob Mitchum's John Wayne's lifts statements, I read them too but I never could check out their reliability. Let's admit he really said that, it is Robert Mitchum! I read things frankly "unbelievable" and I can assure you I LOVE that fabulous man-actor! He more than once said about himself, he was the greatest lyer ever! I don't say he lied but...Be that as it may, John Wayne was "diminished" at the time; everybody knows that and yet, he remained "colossal"! I have re-watched "Rooster Cogburn" and though it is from 1975, he looks great at 68 and despite he visibly did not do the slightest effort to maintain him in good health! He looks like a grizzly!
For the rest I invite you to refer again and again to mike c words and Gonzalo's too! Those posted by mike on 27 oct. are particularly relevant!
OK Billy Bob, you're free to believe your neighbour rather than your own eyes and tons of testimonies relegating your pal's comments to "non sense": John Wayne 6'1! Why not 5'11 or less! That is strange how people LOVE to diminish those who suceeded in being "greater than life"!
On the contrary, I use them as "references" not to pretend being eventually their match BUT just to help me to go forward!
I remember a friend of mine telling me, swearing it without the slightest doubt in his voice, that Burt Lancaster was 5'10 or 11 tops.
He met him and found himself as tall as Burt! The problem is that Burt never was under 6'!
Imagine how STUPID John Wayne should have been to remove his boots before someone being so able to testify how tricky he used to be! If I want to look taller than I real am and go to a lot of trouble in order to maintain the illusion in wearing so ugly and uncomfortable lifts (3 or 4 inchs), what kind of stupid guy should I be to unveal the reality just to ...swimm!
Gonazalo, I agree with you (surprised?) and I bet my bottom dollar that Robert Ryan was 6'4 even in the later years. Watch "the professionals": he looks clearly taller than Lee Marvin and 6'3 bulky Woody Strode and way taller than Burt Lancaster.
John Wayne looks tall even alone in the desert where he acted so many times!
When staggering at the end of "three godfathers", he looks very tall, in the searchers, this so magnificent, beautiful, one of the most fabulous shot ever, where he turns around before the door is closed on him, once more staggering and leavin...alone: he looks definitely very tall!
That happens ONLY with real tall men, not simply "tall". Deal!
Gonzalo said on 29/Oct/07
Billy Bob said on 28/Oct/07
My neighbour said he saw Duke in the early 50`s. They were swimming and he noticed Wayne`s 2-3 inch boots. After he took them off and was barefoot my neighbour said he was SHOCKED!
My neighbour is, at the age of 84, about 5-11. But in his youth he was 6-3. He stood next to Duke and he said that he was CLEARLY taller!
I dont really believe that my dear neighbour would lie. No, hell no. Of course this sucks because there is no proof about this. But... I do believe my neighbours word...
My 84-year-old, very honest and gentle man told me that.... JOHN WAYNE WAS 6-1 INCHES TALL, AND HAD A BEER BELLY!
mike c said on 27/Oct/07
Patrick, you can get the book from Barnes & Noble..you can order it and have it delivered to your home.....it's less than $10.00...As Gonzalo will agree, it's a fantastic history of the Duke in pictues albeit showing a very, very short John Wayne..he was no more that 6' tall....
mike c said on 27/Oct/07
Gene C, please give us the source of your statement regarding Bob Mitchum and the fact that the Duke wore lifts on and off screen. It's obvious your computer doesn't let you scroll down to the myriad sources of proof that he was indeed was 6'4"+...but, you can't be all bad, 6'3" is fairly close to 6'4"..the width of my thumb.....do yourself a favor and rent or buy the following:
The Quiet Man....indeed 6'4.5"
In Harms Way...pause the tv at the scene between George Kennedy as he and the Duke, face to face (Kennedy 6'4-5") board the airplane...look at the combat boots of Kennedy and the shoes of the Duke...
Donavan's Reef..2" taller than Lee Marvin
Also, get on the internet if your computer allows you and type in John Wayne's Height......of course we can always just comment on what so and so said he heard from his neighbor 50 years ago! Luv you Patrick and Gonzalo!...it's almost getting toooo easy...there's sooo much evidence it's scary..mike c
Gene C said on 26/Oct/07
Robert Mitchum said Duke wore lifts on and off screen. Those Frankenstein cowboy boots her wore are a bit funny. In early films Wayne looks not particularly tall but he exxagerated it later on in his career. My vote goes to Duke being no taller than 6'3".
patrick said on 26/Oct/07
Thanks a lot friends! I know "the" book about the Duke but I did not know "you" got pictures from it in scanning them! Good job!
Each time I asked it...it was unavailable!
As for respective opinions of the Duke and Rock, as you know and can check it out in scrolling down this page, I know it and I 100% agree with you as always (for I think Anonymous is "you" mike c but let me know if I am wrong!).
Oh, I just paid attention to your signature! Sorry!
Gonzalo, I appreciate all what you write as micke c's and it is interesting to notice how similar are our western societies, especially regarding TV!
I also agree with you about it at 100%.
In the states, there are a lot of local TV channels(local, maybe but often very very spread out over a state and even several!) you can watch very old films and particularly, westerns or series on.
But if only with TCM, AMC or TV Land, you have a choice very hard to get in any other country!
Cine Club was also the name of the French evening Movie show I was referring to.
So, I wish I could meet more people like you because I feel both of you as real "soul brothers" and frankly, in this very peculiar world, that makes me feel good!
So, have a nice week end guys and...Hurrah for 6'4 John Wayne!
Gonzalo said on 26/Oct/07
Dear Patrick. TVs in Spain don`t broadcast old movies anymore. They used to but not now. Anyway it wasn`t easy to see silent movies or movies made before 1936. I used to go to the Filmoteca Espa
Anonymous said on 25/Oct/07
Thanks, Gonzalo. Patrick, try to get the book, The Duke: A Life in Pictures..Barnes and Noble sells it..you won't regret it and I just know you'll appreciate it as much as I have...even Gonzalo has a copy in Spain...When I get a moment, I'll write what Hudson said about the Duke and how the Duke felt about the Rock....each respected the other...what you've seen on this page regarding the Duke and Rock( negative things)... is not true and just the crap that guys retell without bothering to think for themselves. mike c
patrick said on 25/Oct/07
Dear Gonzalo, I saw that movie in a French show calle "the midnight cinema" because it is aired around 12 pm. I am sure TCM aired it because they are great there and Tod Browning was a genius!
Don't miss that fantastic silent movie which, as many others of that Director, relegates our today's ones to amateur's featurettes!
I can assure you that watching old American movies is much easier in the USA than seeing any vintage one in any other country!
What I love with the Duke is that though he passed away almost 30 years ago (incredible!) he still is everywhere in any store, whether it is in America or anywhere else abroad!
Larger than life...
Gonzalo said on 25/Oct/07
Patrick, the pic from Fort Apache comes from Mike C. The remainder from the book The Duke: a life in pictures. all those pics were scanned by Mr. Mike C.
patrick said on 24/Oct/07
Very nice pic Gonzalo! Where do you dig them up?
Mike c, I love your sense of humor! By the way, in 1952, Victor was 66 while shooting the quiet man.
He probably was the bulkiest very famous actor ever, the other one being Clint Walker. I mean, not bodybuilt actor as Arnold or others are nowadays!
Have you ever seen Victor in "the unholy three" a Tod Browning's masterpiece starring in 1925, Lon Chaney? We see him as Hercules (a fair one!) and he is just like a strong bodybuilder! This man was...over dimensioned by nature! British and not Irish despite his name, he was a great man, very brave and probably as close to heroes he embodied as far can be a current Colin Farrel or a Brad Pitt! What a pity!
mike c said on 23/Oct/07
Thank you, Gonzalo. But, can't you see he's wearing 4" lifts...without them the girl would certainly be taller....Gracias, amigo. Cuidate. Mike C
said on 23/Oct/07
I have uploaded a new John Wayne pic in my album. My pal Mike C sent it to me. Guess what? Wasyne looks tallClick Here
dmeyer said on 21/Oct/07
it is hard to see him under 6'4 maybe even 6'5
mike c said on 19/Oct/07
Thank you, Gonzalo..great pics! Especially the one with Martin. Now, the Duke towers over Dean, who,according to most sites, was at least 5'10.5" tall. Wayne sure does look 6'4"+ to me, but it's obvious he was wearing 5.5" lifts. So, Gonzalo, your picture just proves you wrong. Nice try. Welcome, also, Montana. Mike C...ps...Tony G, that means that perhaps Victor McLaglen could have been 6'3" tall at age 70 when he made The Quiet Man with Duke..well, Gonzalo/Patrick, perhaps you're right again.
patrick said on 19/Oct/07
montana, I love your pseudo because I do love the Montana State AND, what you say! Welcome aboard too!
Jimmy was a bit younger than the duke but looked older many years before that last movie. John Wayne NEVER looked really old; he still looked strong, like an veteran tree!
5'10"": very good example of what I call "obstinate opinion"! Whteher it is about that or anything else, some people stick to their guns even though those ones are...empty! BUT, you're right mike c, theyr are utterly entitled to do so, in spite of what "we" can think of it. After all, billions of people thought for decades that communism was the better way to live!
Nevertheless, "5'10", it verges on the bad faith and nothing else!
Happy to "talk" with you fellas!
Tony G said on 19/Oct/07
Jimmy Stewart was born on May 20, 1908. So he was 68 years old in 1976.
mike said on 18/Oct/07
Gonzalo, I'm missing all the fun! When I click on your pics. I get text, but no pics. What am I doing wrong? It usually works. Maybe you can send them to my e-mail as attachments..I'm getting curious...Something about common sense-even a Martian can see the difference in height. This is true especially after seeing countless movies, photos, and reading about 4 books on the Duke. But, Catsman's entitled to his opinion-we don't agree, but he's entitled to it. Believe this or not, guys, one of my teachers (she's 4'9" tall) told me her father met the Duke and was sure the Duke was only 5'10"..his height. And, she was serious about it! That means (correct me if I'm wrong here) that the Duke wasn't wearing 4" lifts; the lifts were actually 6"..! Now, that makes sense!!!!! NOw it's all coming together.
montana said on 18/Oct/07
hi ray i thought jhonwayne was taller than 6'4.he looks it in all his movies,he looks so big next to all the other actors in the movies
Gonzalo said on 18/Oct/07
Hi, Ray and Patrick. Yes, I was joking, specially about all those four inch comments that want to tell us Wayne was around 6`1.
My pics show what Patrick said: if I didn
patrick said on 18/Oct/07
mikeC, about Catsman's comments, I find them, sorry Catsman, a bit far fetched. One has to watch star's movies to get a reasonable appreciation of their height, give or take one inch. In the Gonzalo's pics, the Duke is always much taller than everybody and not only "taller". Even though I wouldn't know John Wayne, admitting I come from the planet Mars, that would be just enough for me.
Jimmy Stewart was still 6'3 MIN. at 70: when getting on my (late) friend's car (a limo: Chevy Caprice 77) he had to "break" his endless back no to hurt his head and once inside, he was at a hair of the ceiling! John Wayne used also his car but it was before and I remember Paul (my friend) telling me he took all the available room of its Plymouth's rear seat.
Paul carried a lot of celebrities for 40 years, the Duke proving the most imposing he ever met. He was always talking about the Burt Lancaster's hand grip too, as almost the same "torture" as John Wayne's!
patrick said on 18/Oct/07
Ray!!! OF COURSE he is joking! You should know Gonazalo better and I invite you to read him as mikeC in scrolling down this page so as to realize how them (and I)we "see" the "short" John Wayne (must I precise I am laughing too?)
Hey, Gonzalo! Very nice pics for sure! Thanks a lot!
Ray said on 18/Oct/07
You havin a laugh Gonzalo ???
said on 18/Oct/07
Wayne wearing lifts next to Dean MartinClick Here
Wayne looking barely over 1`85 with these womenClick Here
Wayne looking shorter than Ronald Reagan in this oneClick Here
John Wayne should be inmediately downgrade
mike said on 17/Oct/07
Thanks, Catsman....you know Jimmy Stewart was getting on in age also when he and the Duke made The Shootist...Jimmy was still 6'3" tall I'm told when he made the movie......I think he was pushing 70.Some tall gents just don't shrink..how about it guys, how old was Jimmy when he made The Shootist with JW?..Catsman, I may not agree with you, but I like you because you're a gentleman and I'm having a ball discussing/debating...take care. Mike C
Catsman said on 17/Oct/07
Mike - I'm not so much of a fan of that film to buy it so I'll wait until it comes on TV:) I think its worth saying that McLaglen was born either in 1886 or 1883, according to the link you have sent us, and would have been almost 70 by the time this film was made. The 6-3 height (if that was the correct bare foot measurement) was probably made when he was boxing in his 20s, so he might not have been that tall in 1952. Even then, we don't know if he was measured in his boxing shoes or if they rounded to the nearest inch. For example, he might have been just over 6-2 and a half at the weigh-in wearing his boxing boots. So, bare foot he might have been 6-2 at peak and was more like 6-1 by 1952!
On the other hand, maybe he started out at near 6-3 and a half bare foot and didn't shrink much at all in old age.
I guess a boxing historian might be able to tell us how they did the measurements in those days. Enjoy the logic;-)
Joshua said on 17/Oct/07
Yep, but if a man helps me like John Wayne helped Hudson, there`s no way I would say things like he said. Yes, John Wayne had to look like John Wayne and those lifts were a HUGE thing. Size was one main thing about Wayne. What was Hudson thinking? How would Wayne react to those actions? He treated Hudson like his own brother and then Hudson stabbed him in the back! Doesn`t sound fair..
said on 16/Oct/07Click Here
Guys, if you can, rent or buy the Quiet Man...the uncut version..I have it. Play the movie and pause it when you get to the confrontation between The Duke and Victor McLaglen in the widow's home..Wayne wants to buy his dad's property...Victor, in love with the widow, wants to outbid Wayne..the two men stand face to face..shoes showing..no lifts in sight....now, go the page at the beginning of my comments...you tell me
Wayne was 6'2" at max...better yet, go to the next scene at the bar when Wayne apparently insults Victor..even throws a towel on him....boys, Wayne is at least 1.5 inches taller....love the google page!...Gonzalo, gracias...you beat me to it. Just reread a couple of bios. on the Duke..Rock was indeed indebted to the Duke and would never have insulted him as the quotes below insinuate. Catsman, got to run to a meeting, but enjoy your logic..we'll discuss further.
Gonzalo said on 16/Oct/07
Rock Hudson said this about John Wayne:
"John Wayne was then the Hollywood legend, and I was on screen with him. The guy is an angel. He saved my life back then when no other film maker wanted to know me."
Catsman said on 16/Oct/07
Joshua - Hudson was realistic about Hollywood and knew that a film star image is not a true representation of the individual. He himself underwent name changes, teeth capping etc... to become a star. His point was that the real John Wayne was not the one portrayed on screen. Wayne still had to maintain the image that was expected of him long after he had been weakened by illness, had put on weight, lost his hair and some height.
Sean Connery, for example, wore a wig in all the James Bond films because the public wouldn
patrick said on 16/Oct/07
Actually, Rock was a very nice guy, according to most people having met him or knowing him intimately.
By the time he made this movie with the Duke, he, in fact was a bit
Joshua said on 16/Oct/07
Patrick, I understand. Thanks for explaining.
Just wondering what kind of man Hudson was saying things like that?
patrick said on 15/Oct/07
1/Catsman: I did not say "for you" even though you could be "included" in it. My message was about people who deny things when they are obvious. Nothing to do with being or not, a "fan". I am 54 and if I love some actresses and actors, I just cannot be a fan! That is for me, a childish, even if nice one, attitude.
Please, re read what you wrote at the time and try to figure out "why" I answered "that".
2/mike C, my friend, what you wrote is perfectly clear while it is subtle and hard to explain! Furthermore, everything is perfectly RIGHT in your text! So good common sense plus a real cleverness.
3/Anonymous: In what year that photo was taken please, I mean the one with the gigantic Clint Walker and the Duke? If after 1964, please remember he was a wounded man, severely!
Actually, Clint was 6
Catsman said on 15/Oct/07
Gonzalo - that is the picture I was talking about. Wayne is definitely not seated but standing on one leg. Look at his jacket - it hangs straight down on the left showing that his leg is straight (otherwise it would ruck up on his leg). His other leg is resting on the seat that Fitzgerald is sitting on, and he is leaning to that side. This is a good example of how pictures can show different things. Like I say, the ground is probably uneven so it proves very little.
Douglas is a great star, but I'm sure he was shorter than that. This probably isn't the best place for me to argue about his height, but the point is that he should not have been looking an inch taller than Mitchum!
said on 15/Oct/07
Catsman, the pic you are talking about is this one, that I posted here on July 12thClick Here
It seems Wayne is algo seated. Wayne was taller than McLaglen in the quiet man, and also in She wore a yellow ribbon. Not much, because Victor was very big, but taller anyway.
In my opinion Douglas was at least 5`10. I don`t know why he is listed shorter inn celebheights. I haven
Joshua said on 15/Oct/07
"I did a movie with Duke Wayne and was very surprised to find out he had small feet, wore lifts, and a corset. Hollywood is seldom what it seems." -Rock Hudson
What do you think about that?
Catsman said on 14/Oct/07
Mike C - rotating the picture doesn't alter the ratio of anything as such. If you were standing there looking at the two people you would have a sense of what was vertical, but when looking at a picture the eye references the frame of the image for horizontal and vertical information. In order to view the scene as it was, you first have to rectify the frame so that it is in aligned with the true vertical and horizontal axis. Otherwise it is a slight trick of the eye. What I
Anonymous said on 14/Oct/07
Well.... Now I have seen so many Wayne movies that I have to agree with you.... He really was 6-3!!! He was 99% of the time the biggest man on screen.... I`ve seen one photo with Clint Walker. Wayne was a big man but Walker made him look like a goddamn Nick Nack.
mike c said on 12/Oct/07
Catsman, before we go any further, did you see the movie Donovan
Catsman said on 12/Oct/07
patrick - I have tried to put forward a constructive and scientific point. If you think that I am twisting things in some sort of blind fanatisism then you are totally wrong. If you are a fan of John Wayne that's OK, but it probably means you are actually the one who is not objective. My interest is in films rather than film stars, and am simply doubtful about his quoted height given what I have seen.
And no, I'm not saying Lee is as tall, I'm saying that the picture has to be adjusted before you can compare. That's just basic logic.
patrick said on 12/Oct/07
Catsman..."you can lead a horse to water but..."Frankly, if you really wnat to see the Duke as tall or so as Lee Marvin, OK!
You know what? I saw a pic of John Wayne and Mickey Rooney and, after all, thinking it over, the difference...
Catsman said on 12/Oct/07
Mike c - what I'm saying is that even if the ground is totally level, when you adjust the picture so it is genuinely straight, as I've described, the difference becomes much less.
mike c said on 11/Oct/07
Hi Gonzalo. Maybe I'm imagining it, but you posted the Lee/Wayne pic with the footwear showing and even commented on the sneakers the Duke was wearing a while ago. Catsman, I've seen the pic that Gonzalo sent and it shows the Duke next to Lee, side by side, sneakers on feet...no lifts anywhere to be found. Am I right, Gonzalo? Mike C ps. Catsman, look at the chin line of both and tell me that the difference is less than 2 inches.
Gonzalo said on 11/Oct/07
Yes, Catsman, pics can be deceiving. But I have seen the movie and in one scene they walk together on even ground and Wayne is taller, around 4 or 5 cms. It is a nice movie, I hope you like it. It is not among the best movies of Wayne and Ford together but it
patrick said on 11/Oct/07
Very nice and "accurate" pic Gonzalo!
Catsman said on 11/Oct/07
Gonzalo, thanks for posting that. It
Gonzalo said on 11/Oct/07
Hi, Catsman. Until you see the Donovan
patrick said on 10/Oct/07
Catsman "widely reported" 4 inch lifts? No way! I never everheard of that! Lifts, yes, 4 inch ones, certainly not: just try to figure out them!! John Wayne in "talons aiguilles" as it is said in french ("needle heels")!
"We" did not especially "studied" his height...we just opened our eyes and notice what is obvious for our prime.
About Lee Marvin who definitely was 6'2 even in his old days, it is as easy to check what Gonzalo and mike C write as about the Duke: hundreds of films!
Did you ever really watch John Wayne movies? I say that because I repeat his height is obvious but for guys like Viper! I wonder how "that" can be such a matter of debate! That is different with current actors because of the way directors most often shoot them with angles, sophistication essentially dating from the 60ies.
Catsman, take ANY Howard Hawks movie with Wayne or not, and you will have what a other great director, Japanese this time, Ozu, always did: still camera according to an angle showing characters from the same point of view as if he were (the director) no more than 5'5 tall. Hawks is the best example and he did with Ford, the best movies ever, whether it is with the Duke or not.
Thanks for trying!
Catsman said on 10/Oct/07
Mike C - I did try to post some examples but there are unspecified word filters set on this site and those emails won't post because of the names I entered. Do some keyword searches on the web, as I did, and you'll find quite a few references. They might all originate from one exagerated source, of course, but I do think that there is some truth in the story.
I did take a look at that picture from 21st. It's not the best reference because of the wide angle which tends to enlarge the edges and Wayne is leaning his head, but he does look 6ft 4. I take your point about 4 inch lifts being unlikely but perhaps he still had some sort of lifts?
I can't comment on the Lee Marvin comparison until I see it for myself.
mike c said on 9/Oct/07
Catsman, no offense meant. Take a pair of your favorite shoes/boots, and put 4" lifts (maybe use paper, styrofoam, etc) and please let us know if you can walk and/or run using them. Please let me know the written source of these mythical 4" lifts...I want to read for myself. Respect your opinion, but honestly can't even begin to agree with it...Lee Marvin was 6'2" and, as Gonzalo points out, Wayne was at least 2" taller wearing sneakers..check this out: Gonzalo says on 21/May/07 Catsman, please scroll down
Well, I hope this thing works. Here are some pics that Mike C sent to me and one that I already had of Wayne towering over 6ft john ford. I hope you all can see it. wayne looks very tall in this pics but we know how it works: Wayne is wearing lifts or Ford was 5`9. The same old story
Catsman said on 9/Oct/07
You guys seem to have studied John Wayne more than I have, or care to, so you may well be right. I read that he wore lifts of a large size (4 inches is widely reported), it's not something I've judged myself. Maybe it's folklaw. To say I'm in denial suggests that I have some problem with him being that tall. I certainly don't care that much! I'll keep an eye out for Donovan's Reef.
patrick said on 9/Oct/07
Thanks Friends! Anyway, "that" is ridiculous! Already that old story of lifts and moreover 4' lifts! Frankly...
Some people appear taking pleasure in downgrading others, especially "very known people", stars, celebrities. It is so easy to reduce them under the pretext of "demythify" any person "too worshipped" man or woman in their opinion.
Gonzalo said on 9/Oct/07
Catsman comment is hard to understand. There is no way Wayne wore four inch lifts; I don
mike c said on 8/Oct/07
Catsman, if you indeed saw The Quiet Man, maybe you missed three important scenes. The one with Victor McLaglen in the widow's home where the Duke haggles for his father's property. They're face to face, you get a great shot of the shoes....if you see 4" heels/lifts you are definitely in denial. Earlier in the movie when he's being driven to his hometown in a horse and buggie, you get a good look at the shoes he wears throughout the movie....again, the 4" lifts are no where to be scene.....and the best shot of all, when he's standing in the doorway of his cottage and his wife has gone AWOL, he's barefoot...he's taller than the doorway....I know, they purposely built the cottage to make his look tall....
patrick said on 8/Oct/07
Very well and "long enough" posted Russ! "Robert Mitchum was not close to being Wayne's height in the movie. In some scenes yes, Robert Mitchum looks tall. But, it was only because of the camera angle when Wayne was in the background": what could I add ?? Even "me"? Perfect!
Catsman, what on earth are trying to say mentioning "4 inch lifts" ? That really makes no sense at all! Where did you dig that up?
Hey mike c, Gonzalo and now, Russ, what do you think? Maybe in getting on in age I have lost "something" but frankly, I find that typically as "wanting being right at all cost" arguments!
mike c said on 7/Oct/07
Well said, Russ.
Russ said on 6/Oct/07
I've been watching John Wayne movies for a long time. In every movie, he is considerably taller than almost every other man in the film. The only other actors who even came close to Wayne's height were Jimmy Stewart, Ward Bond, Woody Strode and George Kennedy. All of these men were bonifide tall men. If John Wayne truly was 5'10" or 5'11" as some people want to think, he'd have to have been wearing 6"lifts to have been taller than these other men. I doubt very much that Wayne was wearing 6" inch lifts in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, "The Sons of Katie Elder",etc. He did a fair amount of running in his Westerns. You can't run when you are wearing 6" lifts. I've watched "El Dorado" probably 10 times over the years. Robert Mitchum was not close to being Wayne's height in the movie. In some scenes yes, Robert Mitchum looks tall. But, it was only because of the camera angle when Wayne was in the background, etc. Many actors are shorter than we think they are. But, John Wayne truly was a tall, big man.
mike c said on 6/Oct/07
Catsman, no offense meant, but if you read, please scroll down and read my contribution dated July 20 'o7...and, if you can schedule it, watch very carefully The Quiet Man....minimum 6'4" barefoot...the man he fights was the monster boxer Victor (6'3")...
mike c said on 6/Oct/07
Russ, Catsman is in denial.....
Russ said on 6/Oct/07
In the Bruce Dern interview I mentioned previously, Dern mentioned that John Wayne "threw me around like a rag doll" in the fight scene from "The Cowboys. When you figure Wayne's age at that time and that he probably had only one lung, that's impressive.
Catsman said on 5/Oct/07
I saw the last minute of a film starring Wayne and Robert Mitchum the other day. I think it was El Dorado, made in 1966. The two looked almost the same height. I think Wayne was 6-4 with his lifts, not barefoot.
Russ - Dern probably meant he was giant in character or charisma.
Gonzalo said on 5/Oct/07
Bruce Dern and John Wayne. In that movie, The war wagon Wayne and Kirk Douglas shot two guys at the same time killing both. Douglas said "mine reached the floor first" and Wayne replies "mine was taller". Wayne
patrick said on 5/Oct/07
Yes, I always saw him as 6'1 in his "bad guy roles" years in the 60ies. He was mainly confronted to the Duke in "the Cowboys" where though being a strapping man himself, Bruce looks like a teenager against a baobab when fighting John Wayne!
glenn said on 5/Oct/07
i think bruce dern told me he was 6-1 in youth but lost height.
Russ said on 5/Oct/07
I recently saw a documentary on John Wayne. In the documentary, they were interviewing Bruce Dern who was in the movie "The War Wagon" with John Wayne and Kirk Douglas. Bruce Dern, who is probably at least 6 feet himself, stated that John Wayne was "a giant of a man".
patrick said on 1/Oct/07
Well posted Russ and "common sense marked". The Duke, unlike Rock Hudson or Bob Mitchum (ah! all those wonderful actors!)very rarely stood straight up and on the other hand, tilted all the time a often swaying head; remember: his famous look, the eyes up to the one he was talking to!
mike c said on 24/Sep/07
patrick, I had to erase what I wrote twice...guess I'm getting soft in my old age....not once did I ever see Rock dwarf the Duke...not once..King must have seen a movie that the rest of the world did not see nor knew existed....there's no accounting for perception nor taste for that matter!! Keep your common sense coming. mike c
patrick said on 24/Sep/07
mike C, may I tell you you are too polite with Mr King. That is my way of saying what I think of such a silly thing! It is always possible to say anything about anything; non sense is the most common argument for peopla unable to play fair and square; No argument but a real will to say "something", preferably cynical, even evil, no problem! let's invent it and not matter it is completely incredible and not founded at all! "We" so have talked, at all cost! Pathetic!
mike c said on 22/Sep/07
King, you're joking, right?
King said on 22/Sep/07
John Wayne was not 6-4. He refused to act with Rock Hudson, because Rock completely DWARFED Duke.
Patrick said on 17/Sep/07
"hmm, you had to read "refering to" of course...sorry!
Patrick said on 17/Sep/07
"the shootist", the film you are referencing to, proves to be the last Duke's one: he was old and in so good shape. Yet, he still stood very tall and whether some like it or not, he looks taller than Jimmy Stewart. Forget the "uneven soil they stand together" photo. Look at the movie. Anyway he is still at least as tall as Jimmy and never forget how ill this great man had been and what He had gone through! My brother lost two good inches just in getting a severe cancer and that occured in a couple of weeks! The Duke underwent several severe surgical operations. I still wonder how, for example, he could shoot "the sons of Kathie Elder" just a few weeks after having a lung removed!
A damned great Man if ever!
Anonymous said on 13/Sep/07
John Wayne was a solid 6'3. In a movie with Ron Howard there was a scene where
Wayne was barefoot and Howard was wearing boots and Wayne still towered
over him. 6'4 in his prime.
Patrick said on 13/Sep/07
Sure mike; I just wanted to add a "superior, essentiel" touch because, dear friends, I really and deeply feel that "we", all of us, need that kinda great nexus in a world full of "noise and fury" and too often "signifying nothing" or at least, "not so much"!
Remember how Gonzalo and you and sometimes a few others, considered hat very site as a basis to develop values we all are attached to;
This world is not that bad but, what is crazy lies in the fact while we do not know war (Hmm...) on our lands (I speak as an European here!)and racial differences are way less obvious than "in the good old times" like the 50ies, there is a lack of values, of things to stick to. As ressult we live in a "gentle" but quite insipid and a bit fuzzed world. In Europe and especially in France, that is far more evident!!! Believe me! I am always between the "two worlds" and there is no need to compare them!!! Yet, feature films being a "mirror" of our society, we can see "us" through the choice that very society does as for its "stars"; the same with stupid TV shows we won't be able to watch "tomorrow" as we can do for the same silly ones of the 50ies; Question of charm! I do not see any part of "future kitsch" in our vulgar today's TV shows! Not all of them but...I am sure (for those still reading that boring statement!) "you" will see what I mean!
SO, people able to keep cool enough not to be laid astray by all of that "easy way out", people like you mike c and Gonzalo are like a cold glass of fresh water in a burning desert!
Sorry for being so long!
mike c said on 12/Sep/07
Patrick, we can also call it common sense..of which you have quite a bit just like my buddy Gonzalo...great pic. G.
Patrick said on 12/Sep/07
Thanks again buddies mike c and Gonzalo; That is funny how each of you react exactly as..."the two others" do! That is what I call a "psychic link"!
Gonzalo said on 12/Sep/07
It`s true he doesn
mike c said on 11/Sep/07
I'm sorry captainobvious (I hope it's not your real name!)..I reacted very quickly and dashed off a comment without seeing your "Someone wasn't 6'4"...I guess you were there when the pic was taken and know by heart the heights of all the men in the pic. and their names so us stupid folks can do some research...I mean, how else could you possibly say 'Someone wasn't 6'4"? (remember cap' he was getting on in age when the pic was taken...). Ed. Rob. I saw a movie of John Wayne with Roy Rogers....Roy was about 6' tall(Roy was in his twenties)...The Duke towered over him...I'll do my homework and get back to you..I believe the movie can out in the 30's...nice piece of acting by both superstars.
mike c said on 11/Sep/07
captainobvious,..... AND YOUR POINT IS? Oh, I hope it's not the old John Wayne's short story again...Nice pic. though. mike c
Patrick said on 11/Sep/07
On an uneven soil surface ? What is strange in there? I don't figure out...furthermore, the Duke was not young at the time of this pic and also, who are those guys? Who knows how tall they are? Kinda pic I like but not to serve as measurement basis in any way!
said on 10/Sep/07
Here's a curious pic. Very curious indeed:Click Here
Someone wasn't 6'4".
[Editor Rob: I was watching early Wayne, c-movies, the guy in late 20's to early 30's range when thin in those movies really did tower people.]
mike c said on 7/Sep/07
chris, 6'.4.5" minimum in his prime. Glad you're on board.
chris said on 6/Sep/07
The Duke could have scratched 6'5" in his prime height.
Patrick said on 4/Sep/07
YES Gonzalo! Exactly what I think: "Wayne looked taller in the shots on even ground, specially by the end of the movie when they meet in the headquaters preparing their last mission Wayne looked clearly taller".
Nothing to add!
Iam sure Ryan was more than 6'3 and was well 6'4 as repported.
I just watched "the hellfighters" with 6'5 T.Hutton and Wayne once more, "in turns" looked as or almost, tall as him or shorter, depending...how the Duke STOOD beside Tim: actually, J.Wayne was as you often how to say , swaying and his head was rarely still (as the Brando's one!); even late in his career, the Duke still was very supple and i'd say "flexible"; it was in his nature; his walk was as a floating boat and he always talked with moves of his head underlying his words; even his face was in move: remember how he would lift his forehead skin, looking then very "dangerous"!
But Tim, him, remains all the time as a very rigid and right stick!
Until then guys !
Gonzalo said on 4/Sep/07
Hi, Patrick, Mike C. Well, Robert Ryan was also a very tall man and a great actor. He was a boxer before becoming an actor. In The flying leathernecks, as you say Patrick, it was hard to tell who looked taller, cause it depended on the shot. To me Wayne looked taller in the shots on even ground, specially by the end of the movie when they meet in the headquaters preparing their last mission Wayne looked clearly taller. I would like to see the movie again in order to take a pic of that shot so people here can see Wayne was taller.
My mother and my brother saw The longest day the other day and my mum said that they looked very similar in height but Wayne could be a little taller.
Anyway, they were both great in all terms. At least 6`3 for them
mike c said on 2/Sep/07
Hi Gonzalo, Patrick. Patrick, I enjoy reading what you write...a lot of common sense. I don't think, though, Gonzalo is trying to show that Ryan is taller than the Duke. His great pic. just shows the height of the Duke..6'4" at least..on the Ryan page he's listed as 6'4" yet in Gonzalo's pic. I feel the Duke is a tad taller.look at the shoulders and the chin..call me silly...Quidate, amigo. Keep it coming Patrick, my friend. mike c
patrick said on 31/Aug/07
ALANR, frankly, if you are still "there" about that topic...I know vry well that foot print WHICH MEANS NOTHING at all!
I can't get over it! People still continue to trust that kind of vague impression from a foot print or so rather than just simply watching movies!
That scares me when I think such people could serve as witnesses in a trial!
Gonzalo: that is just a pic among many others and you know as we all do, that a pic will never be worth the natural we find an entire movie; The one looking taller at a moment will seem shorter after.
Furthermore, that is taken from "the longest day" in 1962; the Duke was supposed not to be as tall as in "the flying leathernecks" in 1951. In Tom Welling page, I wrote precisely how in that last movie, he first (first scene together) looks shorter by one to two inches and, suddenly seem atller ALL ALONG THE FILM, with no need of any trick!
In that '51 movie, they walk along often, wearing exactly the same USAF shoes and enough long to allow us to appreciate they respective height;
No doubt the Duke was slighlyt taller at the time and even more broadshouldered!
NO DOUBT unless being blind or decided to deny reality.
In 62, it is visible John, while staying in very good shape (for a man smoking more tha 4 packs and drinking "reasonnably") was not the same athletic man any more, contrary to R.Ryan who never was fat and kept his slender silhouette until his too early death.
Hope to get an answer from you and mike c; meanwhile: take care !
mike c said on 29/Aug/07
Great pic. Gonzalo! Alanr, I know someone wrote about the boot size...scroll down to Mike T May 30, June 2....interesting thing..boots
ALANR said on 29/Aug/07
We were at Graumans Chinese Theater last month and his boot print was tiny--my 8 year olds foot was bigger than his. I do not see how he could be over 6 ft with such a tiny foot if it was really his!!!
said on 29/Aug/07
John Wayne next to Robert Ryan. Hard to say. The same height I would say.Click Here
patrick said on 24/Aug/07
Of course! Sure he was so mike C and Mr Sunshine! I saw the same in the Warner Brothers museum where are displayed many artefacts having belonged to the Duke.
I remember a jacket he wore in the high and the mighty.
To cut a long story short HE was BIG and tall because as says Mr. Sunshine, if not so he should have been very badly built, notably much more bulky, head in shoulders like a funfair brute what he was not!
On the contrary John Wayne was slender even when having got a lot of weight!
He NEVER appeared fat and kept all along his life that incredibly elegant silhouette. I re-watched once more, the cow boys where he looks like a tree trunk compared to the athletic Bruce Dern. Only a really tall man can give that impression with maybe 40 Lbs too much!
mike c said on 23/Aug/07
Thank you, Sunshine. Great piece of info. for the ones who still insist he was short, abeit stocky. The man was huge and if you read below.(July 20th)......"He was like a walking mountain, physically big, huge, amazing to be around" mike c
Ms. Sunshine said on 23/Aug/07
Saw a cowboy shirt worn by J. W., that is displayed at the Gene Autry Western Heritage Museum in Los Angeles, & I could not believe how wide the shoulders were on this shirt. The man had to have been very tall in person or he would have been very disproportionate overall & he does not look that way in his movies.
patrick said on 21/Aug/07
SO NICE WORDS Mike C ! The same about you, of course! Please, mike could you get to Tom Welling page and read what I try to make understand concerning "old fashioned actors"? That would be very nice. Scroll down and try to find other remarks I did about that very profound subject; I say profound because how are and look our today's actors reveals a lot about us, about how our society really is and what are its values.
Hi Gonzalo too! Island in the sky isnot a typical John Wayne film because he does not appear as the emblematic hero he used to being. He is "one" among other guys in a very difficult position. Heroes are, in a way, more "the others", rescuers, whose tallest is J.Arness. I so don't remember seeing him facing the Duke. Easier I think, in the see chase (55), Hondo (53). The best example to watch them together all along the same movie is by far, "big jim mclain" but I doubt this film be ever visible today! That is about Mc Carthism and its heroes would probably seen now as "the vilains", including John Wayne!
To finish: in hellfighters, Hutton looks in turn an inch taller then about the same. I think an inch is rightn not two. Need to get it in DVD!
Many happy returns to all of us, guys!
mike c said on 19/Aug/07
Great to hear from you Gonzalo!! If you can, scan the pic. of Hutton and Wayne in the BOOK and send it to ed. Rob. ...I think an inch is about right, what do you think? Cuidate, Amigo. Mike ps, Patrick, miss you, buddy.
Hmm said on 19/Aug/07
Watch "Hellfighters" with Wayne and 6'5" Jim Hutton. Hutton looks an inch or two taller than Wayne, footwear is unclear though.
Gonzalo said on 17/Aug/07
Hi, guys. Nice article about Wayne, Mike C. Thank you. I have found another movie of Wayne with James Arness, Island in the sky. I hope to have the chance to watch it and see how tall Wayne looks next to 6`7 Arness
patrick said on 6/Aug/07
Mike C : I did! I read your long and fascinating report but as you noticed, it was impossible to take anything down until september; I do not even figure out how I can do it "now"!
William: I am not sure Americans were so "shorter" in the 50ies; At the time, there were the tallest in the world and are not any more. If you take into consideration just "actors" you will see that most of them were between 6 and 6'3, and even more. I always said that if a European actor would have been hired in an American movie, he would so looked just ridiculous, unless using tricks of course.
Some british actors and few Germans were tall at the time (Curd Jurgens) but in France for example, only Yves Monatnd was real tall star and at 6'2 he towered any other actor! Another French star was Jean Marais (one of the best built man ever...without doing ANY sport!)and looked really tall at only 5'11.
At the same height in the USA, Glen Ford looked very average. Alain Delon looked tall at 5'11/2. Look how R.de Niro looks short and fortunately, he played not in the "6 to 6'3" 50ies but in the "5'6 to 5'9" 70ies!
Many of my friends are between 6 and 6'2 and were between 20 and 30 in the 50ies. Just like nowadays. As I wrote it many times, at the time, people were mostly white and those typical "WASP" were rather tall and still are they.
Latinos and others as Asians are rarely over 5'7 or 8. The average has been modified because of this population increasing.
Actors are taken out of the real population and if being tall is right, at 6 to 6'2, beyond, it is considered "too much".
Wayne's time was nevertheless different about that even though 6'5 or more were estimated already too tall.
William said on 5/Aug/07
I don't know, I mean the adults of 1955 were those of two-three generations ago, and about 2-3 inches shorter, on average, than today's adults. He may give the appearance of being a 6'4 or 6'5 man now but he would have only needed to be 6'1 to tower above most men of 1955.
Mike C said on 22/Jul/07
LOW are you also nick? Either way, respect the way you write. Mike C ps Patrick, did you get a chance to read my July 20 post?
LOW said on 22/Jul/07
Mike c, great investigating, I wasn't trying to insist that the Duke was 6'3 1/2 or anyting, I was just conveying information from something I had saw, I would like to help get an accurate reading of of his height weather it's 6'1 or 6'6. I have no doubt that he could have lost at least 1/2 inch by then, he was past his prime physically. I'm suprised that it was from 1955 though, I would have guessed that it was more recent.
Viper said on 22/Jul/07
Mike, that site has the Rock at a ridiculous 6-4 1/2 as well, lol. Not too credible there.
Mike C said on 21/Jul/07
nick, you sound like a reasonable guy. Got this in a google search. Remember, the Duke was gaining weight by then...his life style was starting to get in the way..could easily have lost .5" by this episode...mike c:
10/10/55: "Lucy and John Wayne"
I Love Lucy Episode 129 - Filmed 9/15/55
Story: Lucy and Ethel have made off with the cement slab of John Wayne's footprints. Now the police are called in to investigate.
nick said on 20/Jul/07
I beg to differ Patrick, I had shortend my original remark because I didn't want to praddle on, but I can get more specific about that episode. It's an episode when Lucy is trying to meet the great Duke Wayne so she's snooping around his dressing room looking at stuff when Wayne's massuse comes in. she makes up a story to get ride of him. but right after that, much to her horror, john comes in expecting his messauge, he lay's down on his stomach with his head on the towel and can't see Lucy, he starts to make small talk and finally she has to say something, so in a deep manley voice she say's "so whatcha up to" and he say's "oh about 6'3 1/2". I have to admit, I don't have any real proof to post or episode # or anything.
said on 20/Jul/07
Guys, another interesting site regarding the so-called height of The Duke...open and scroll downn to 6'4.5"Click Here
Oh, yes, I know....not enough proof!! This is getting better, Patrick, it's almost too easy!
said on 20/Jul/07
Patrick, Gonzalo, visit this page: Click Here
then read below what Neil Summers says about the "walking mountain!!!
A few years ago, Albuquerque's Boyd Magers found himself in a bind while compiling an all-time list of top Western stars for Western Clippings, his magazine about cowboy movies and TV shows.
"I kept going back and forth between (singing cowboys) Gene Autry and Roy Rogers for Nos. 2 and 3," Magers said during a phone interview this week. "But there was no question about No. 1. That was John Wayne."
Magers said Wayne throws his tall shadow worldwide.
"You mention him in Japan and people know him instantly," he said. "It's hard to say why. It's an almost undefinable thing, a kind of chemistry on the screen.
"But to me, he epitomizes that manly let's-take-care-of-business attitude that doesn't seem to exist anymore. And the sense that's there's a right and a wrong and no in between."
Wayne - Oscar-winning actor, mythic hero, American icon and one tough hombre - was born Marion Morrison in Winterset, Iowa, 100 years ago today.
He doesn't look his age. A Harris Poll done this year lists him as the third most popular movie star behind Denzel Washington and Tom Hanks.
Not bad for someone who died of stomach cancer in 1979. But legends are not good about lying still.
"John Wayne's image is more mythic than realistic," said Johnny D. Boggs, 45, of Santa Fe, a writer of Western fiction and nonfiction and vice president of the Western Writers of America. "The image he portrayed in the movies is this giant figure for truth, justice and the American way. I don't think you met too many characters like that in the (real) West."
Boggs said the characters in his own award-winning fiction (two Western Writers Spur Awards) are more likely to be influenced by Jimmy Stewart's roles in such movies as 1950's "Winchester
said on 20/Jul/07
Patrick, Gonzalo, go to this site and scroll down to John Wayne...Click Here
everyone thinks he was 6'4"
mike c said on 20/Jul/07
Patrick, The Quiet Man has all the proof of his height if only Nick et.al would take the time to watch it.....taller than the boxing brute Victor McLaglen (6'3")when they stand face to face with shoes (no lifts) showing....he clearly states at the beginning of the movie when Barry Fitzgeral asks,"6'6"? he replies, "6'4.5" ...you can clearly see the shoes...now, that's a fact that he said that, but is it true?.just read and watch his movies and I say YES! Why is he constantly described as 6'4" in his biographies and in many movies statements are made of towering height? You're right, Patrick, as you would also, I'd like to know the episode because I'm going to find it,view it and make up my own mind. Love your comments!! Mike C
Patrick said on 20/Jul/07
What happens with this site? I posted a (for once) short remak yesterday I have to repeat: NO WAY John Wayne ever claimed being 6'3 +. Sorry, nick, he never did that. Whether you badly heard or I don't know but I can assure you he never said that unless you are able to post the proof of the contrary nick. Thanks in advance.
What do you think mike c and Gonzalo?
nick said on 17/Jul/07
In an episode of I love lucy in which he was making a guest appearence when the ricardo's are going out to California, he says I'm 6'3 1/2 and 213. I don't know the year but it was towards the end of the series, so I'm thinking mid 60's, he was getting pretty old by then, he had graying hair,he was probably around 60 yr old +/-
Patrick said on 17/Jul/07
SURE as always at 150% Mike C (sorry, I cannot help putting your nickname with two Caps.!).
Wonderful and so profound and warm remarks about "our" li'l Mouse! Just love it.
mike c said on 16/Jul/07
King, before you post anything else, do yourself a favor and buy two books: John Wayne The Man Behind the Myth and Duke We're Glad We Knew You. You won't be disappointed and just maybe you'll have some substance on to which to attach your opinions. You just might discover that what you have heard is bull****. The books include J. Stewart and the Duke's political views. Don't stop there, get The Duke, A Life in Pictures. ....do you agree Patrick?..Gonzalo, enjoy the book as much as I have. Cuidate! Mike C ps, when I see Mickey Mouse on TV, he's no more than 4-5 inches tall. When I saw him with my daughters in Disney World, he was at least 6'tall..What gives?
Patrick said on 16/Jul/07
Hi there Gonzalo too and Mike C as well!
I dove in "movie stuff" since I was a very little boy: hardly two years old! My dear late mother was crazy about it and knew by heart every existing actor.
It is to believe she passed it on to me because I outwent her in that so exciting topic!
I am SO happy to find here people like both of you Gonzalo and Mike C: I sincerely wish "we" are numerous beyond this site!
Your comment of 07/16 is absolutely relevant. I agree with it at 100%.
As everybody knows it: the Duke was sooo stupid! Look how he directed this so much underrated feature film "Alamo". Sorry for the "Wayne contemptors", I never ever got bored in watching that wonderful and very respectful movie.
He was a "giant" "and not only because he was 2 meters tall" would say a famous french critic in the late 60ies.
sam said on 16/Jul/07
Where did you read this, King?
Gonzalo said on 16/Jul/07
King, I would like to know which are your sources. I am very keen on cinema and I have read many boks: about John Wayne, john Ford, Hitchcock, howard Hawks. In only one book, Hollywood bable on, I have read something about john Wayne`s lifts. It was that quote of Mitchum that has been transcripted in this site. It seems that Wayne was not very intelligent since he semed surprised by Stewart`s height which was well known. After 30 yeras in the industry for both of then Wayne had no idea that Stewart was a tall man.
Hi, Patrick and MikeC. Great to have you on this site. MikeC, ya tengo el libro. Muchas gracias. Me encanta
Patrick said on 15/Jul/07
Yeah Mike C! What could I add ?
King, I heard a friend whi heard a cousin of the house keeper of the grand father of a guy having met at school a nasty pupil just sitten next to a friend of mine having told me "you" wore a wig! With such an evidence, how could I be doubtful? So, I swear you wear a wig and do not tell me the contrary..."please"!
mike c said on 15/Jul/07
It's amazing how sure one can be of himself with just a little bit of secondhand knowledge. I guess, King, you believe everything you hear.
King said on 15/Jul/07
No doubts... John Wayne was a big 230-pounder bull. But six-four? Please...
I heard that in MHSLW he met Stewart who was six-three. Wayne was like "my god!!" and immediately went to Ford and DEMANDED 2 inch -lifts.
And thats the bottom line cause Jimmy Stewart said so.
Patrick said on 14/Jul/07
Mike C..."you're my Man"! I feel "reading my own mind", more than my words and you know that since You have honored me in reading what I tried to express. Whether it is about "this site" - by the way: THANKS A LOT Ed; Rob! - or regarding the stars and what "cinema" really is (or should be)and especially the nowadays stars or supposed such, I meet in your eyes as in AAAA and DaMan (see Tom Welling page), in your way of tackling and envisioning life what I always wanted.
100% ok with you and Gonzalo, a good friend too!
mike c said on 13/Jul/07
Thank you, Gonzalo...I still don't know if you got the book!!!! Patrick, great observation! You see, I grew up in a carpenter's home..in fact he built the house he's lived in for almost 45 years. I have acquired (God given) a sense of height/length...usually I'm not off by a lot. I, too, build and construct as a hobby and know how objects can appear taller,shorter, wider, narrower, etc. depending on what surrounds them. When Frank 2 posted the pic of the Duke in England standing next to a car, I couldn't resist and used my formula of determining heights. He damn well measured 6'almost 4"!Remember the pic? I think it was taken when he was filming the detective series...lost some height by then....look at the fence, the car, the surrounding elements and you tell me this guy was around 6'...I love this site because, for the most part, intelligent people contribute. I respect a good debate and welcome a difference of opinion. Who really cares if the Duke was 6'4" or 6'4.5"...he was an individual that I enjoy watching because of the messages he espoused. There is evil, injustice, cruely,etc. and yet there is hope in the world...I'd rather watch him than all the other crap our so-called movie stars of the day are pushing off as talent....give me Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, etc anytime! It's not that a few of the present stars are not talented..it's just that you walk away not really believing what they did...entertainment? Yes! But does it last? No! So guys, go on debating as gentlemen are bound to do and let's enjoy this site. Mike C ps Gonzalo, recibiste el libro?
Patrick said on 13/Jul/07
Here is what I wrote in the Walter Pidgeon page and think that concerns the Duke as well:
I am watching "dark command": they indeed, appear alike, especially when Wayne is caught and invited by Walter BUT, in the very SAME scene, no cut, and JUST after that, the Duke does not look but really IS clearly taller by at least one inch.
That, once more, should lead everybody to think twice before peremptorily claim "this "or "that".
Frankly, even me, convinced that Walter is about 6'3 or so and J.Wayne more than 6'4 when young, (6'4 after 45-50), I was about to change my mind about the Duke. BUT, I know howaturally, by design, tricky mowies are and I waited for "the rest": the same room, the same shoes since the same scene and yet, not the same height at all! I invite anybody to check that out: that happens all the time and here is why I still am so circumspective regarding all that height stuff!
Nothing is more deceptive, I would say illusional hence misleading, than cinema industry!
I repeat: I would have have sworn this time they were the same height and yet, they were not!
Actually, the perfect example for this site!
Patrick said on 13/Jul/07
BRAVO, all of you! Thanks Gonzalo for your words and superb and rare pics!
In the third one, the Duke is ...sitten!!! Normal he looks smaller than the others!
I repeat, I never heard of him being not tall, not "very" tall, when I was young and while he was still acting and...starring!
No problem about the "confusion" Mike C (I was sure of that!)
Gonzalo said on 13/Jul/07
Hi, MikeC. I just wrote John Wayne in google and searched for pictures. Not bad pics. I have also been anonymous sometimes on celebheights
chris said on 12/Jul/07
In the early 50's he was clearly 6'4 and a half plus, in the 60s he had 2 ribs, and his whole left lung removed so from about '64 onwards he was no longer at his peak height
mike c said on 12/Jul/07
Patrick, I just realized that I was Anonymous on July 10. I wrote Mike C at the end of the post, but never bothered to write it at the beginning....so, I am anonymous. Sorry for the confusion.
mike c said on 12/Jul/07
Gonzalo, great pics. Where did you get the last three.
said on 12/Jul/07
He looks tall to me in this picClick Here
Or in this oneClick Here
You guys will love this one. Wayne looking shorter than Victor McLaglen and John Ford. Lifts, of course.Click Here
In this one Wayne used his lifts againClick Here
Gonzalo said on 12/Jul/07
After all this time discussing about Wayne`s height I haven
Patrick said on 12/Jul/07
THANKS a lot Mike C! Impressed, for sure; I share at 100% your words about common sense AND the fact YOU judge after your OWN mind and got your OWN opinion.
That maybe will surprise you Viper but it is exactly why I like you too: you do not care what other people think and stick to your guns: I appreciate that, believe it or not even though that seems sometimes a bit "irritating" (joke) or or you being "stubborn" (re-joke no offence above all!).
You know what? that is why Americans are so LOVED and in the same time, HATED so much in the world AND why I love them!
Being able to write sometimes so profound thoughts from such a trivial issue as "how tall is a man died since 28 years!" proves how eclectic and sharp and to say the whole truth, "in good health" is the American mind.
Viper, for God's sake...