Julian Sands Height
5ft 10 ¼ (178.4 cm)
Peak height was 5ft 11 (180.3 cm)
British actor best known for roles in films such as The Killing Fields, Arachnophobia, A Room with a View, Leaving Las Vegas, Boxing Helena and Warlock. I had about 1/4 inch more thicker sneaker than him. In person he looked in the 5ft 10-10.5 range, although on his Spotlight resume he used to be listed as 6 feet tall.
5ft 8 Rob and Julian @ Collectormania 2013
You May Be Interested
Add a Comment40 comments
Average Guess (22 Votes)
Peak: 5ft 10.69in (179.6cm)
Current: 5ft 9.89in (177.5cm)
Miss Sandy Cowell said on 20/Aug/21
I don't even know where Otley is, Nik!
I've seen plenty of Julian's acting, and he comes over as quite tall. He's starred in Stephen King's 'Rose Red', David Cronenberg's 'Naked Lunch' and most recently, 'The Haunted Airman', based on the Dennis Wheatley novel and also starring Robert Pattinson, who has to be a good, strong 6ft1.
Julian gets 5ft11 for his peak and 5ft10.25 for today's height.
Nik said on 28/May/20
His full name is Julian Richard Morley Sands and he was born in Otley!
Julian sure does look at least 5'10.25" but he doesn't look 6'0"! A 40th comment is coming his way!
Bwk said on 11/Mar/20
This looks listing looks about right considering your footwear advantage. I don't get how many people here are seeing under 5'10''.
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 29/Jun/19
Christian 6'5 3/8", Julian had 1/4 less footwear and don't forget Rob put down 1/8th inch of his real height which Julian can at least be 5'10 1/4 but i maybe wrong for the 3/8 estimate.
Bobby 5'10 (178) said on 31/Mar/19
Rob is looking at the base of Julian's nose, so it does look to be 2 inches of height difference.
VelikiSrbin said on 6/Mar/19
5'9 in the pic
Zampo said on 9/Nov/18
Based on the photo, looks like he would measure somewhere between 5'9.75 - 5'10 range barefoot. I think 5'10 flat is possible.
Christian 6'5 3/8" said on 2/Jul/18
He looks nowhere near 5'10 3/8" with Rob. Looks 5'9.75" tops.
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 2/Jul/18
I think he deserved 5'10 3/8 now and 5'10 7/8 peak.
Bri said on 25/Apr/18
Looks 178.5 here
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 3/Aug/17
Looked 177cm here in 2013, If he's 177, than his peak couldn't have been 180.
S.J.H said on 3/Aug/17
But with rob here he doesn't look over 177cm since rob say he have 1/4 more shoe than Julian then a flat 5'10 for Julian now and 5'10.5" peak. He don't look 5'11 peak at most 179cm
S.J.H said on 20/Jun/17
The last time rob downgrade him at 5'10.5 might just be his peak and 5'10 now. I watch many of his film he doesn't lost over 1cm to me. 0.75 loss is out of question.
World Citizen said on 12/Jun/17
Looks closer to 177 cm here, but he looks a strong 5'10 with big G.
S.J.H said on 20/Mar/17
Look 5'9.25 with big G at most he hit 5'9.5 and def 5'10 peak
Rick said on 15/Mar/17
If he didn't have any hair the top of his head would be reaching just over 5'9.5 in that picture.
berta said on 11/Feb/17
i think i go with 179 peak and 178 ore sligtly under today. he is only 58 years old. that indicates that he have lost about 1 cm if he is unlycky.
Sandy Cowell said on 21/Jan/17
I have recently finished a Stephen King haunted house double DVD called 'Rose Red'. It counts Julian Sands as one of its stars.
I used to think Julian was a good 6ft tall, but having already seen this picture of him with Rob, I looked at him bearing that in mind and found he still looked about 5ft11, but then the film was made many years ago when Julian was very likely his peak height.
So I will opt for 5ft11 peak and 5ft10 for today.
said on 18/Jan/17
What would you say his head length is, Rob?
also, he comes off to me as a strong 5'9 instead of a 5'10
Headman, I'd say his head was very close to mine so near to 9.5 inches.
Aza said on 15/Sep/16
Wow! Always thought he was a strong six footer.....surprising
truth said on 2/May/16
Looks a strong 5ft10.5 and probably was 5ft11 peak, similar height and age to my dad (late 50s). I doubt he lost more than half an inch.
Peter 180cm said on 21/Apr/16
He looks 5'9.5ish so 5'9.75 or solid 177 is closer maybe 178 max he doesnt look 5cm taller than you above imo...
S.J.H said on 29/Jan/16
Not over 5'9.5 today. I believe hes 5'10 peak but no way 5'11
said on 10/May/15
Hi rob what year was this photo taken?
said on 7/Feb/15
Rob, without the 1/4 inch advantage that you had, he would have been 1.5 inches taller than you? for 1.5 inches, eyes would be at tip of nose, and if 2 , below?
when I saw him I really didn't think he looked over 5ft 10, but then he had 1/4 inch less shoe so I thought I will give him 179 as he might manage to stretch a bit more.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Feb/15
About 5ft10 in the above photo.
said on 9/Feb/14
Rob in the vidéo you look nearer 3,5in shorter and about 4.5 in when you are barefeet , if That is 3in then a Guy like Robert Patrick compare to looks Max 5'10
Jenny was almost 6ft in those heels...I was 5ft 8.25. The barefoot difference is just about 3.75 inches!...but as we know camera angles can sometimes add a bit of height to the taller person...
said on 26/Dec/13
Could his peak height be 5'10.5" instead of 5'11"? He's 55 and it seems odd he'd lose height already.
I think early stuff he really looked a 5ft 11 type guy, in person I don't think he was that tall this year, half inch isn't impossible mid 50's.
said on 29/Nov/13
how old are you Rob?
36 in that photo
Mr. R said on 23/Nov/13
I saw him just after he played PM Tony Blair on stage. He was getting on his bike, but stood up straight to talk with me. Over 5-9, below 5-10.
said on 19/Nov/13
Okay Rob. I met him after a play in LA and he was closer to 5-9. Not very friendly fellow.
maybe with loose posture he could look that to you. I think he's still in 5ft 10 range.
Dicky curtis said on 12/Nov/13
he looks kind of young. could he already have lost half an inch???
Josh B said on 30/Oct/11
Strange how he's described as tall in most places. 5'11 is very weak tall i'd say.
jake, 1.82 m said on 26/Sep/11
I think he might be 181 cm.
Mr. Tempus said on 17/Jul/11
a strong 5'10 in his youth, he looks 5'10 in the warlock movies.
anonymous said on 18/Dec/10
Dude, the guy was totally muscular! DId you not see him naked in "A Room with a View"? Quite a lovely physique!
misha said on 24/Feb/07
Sands appears to be tall because he has a marvelous aquiline nose and high, sweeping forehead, classic "vampire" features. But if you look at his hands,
which can give away more about a person's overall build than you might think,
they are surprisingly thick, almost coarse, suggesting the powerful muscular build that is not so evident under his clothing. Sands, as Mr. R says, is probably not even a real 5'10". But a truly marvelous actor.
Marcus said on 30/Dec/06
I just saw "Romasanta" yesterday, and he looked quite tall, much taller than he really is...I'd say about 6'1'' or 6'2''?
Mr. R said on 29/Jun/05
Rob, I agree with you that Julian looks much taller on film. I expected to look at him eye to eye, but I had to look down more than an inch, and almost 2. My 5-8 friend would verify this. I will be returning to the play in a few weeks, so I will try to get a pic for you.
Mr. R said on 28/Jun/05
While Julian is almost 2 inches shorter than he claims, he is surprisingly more buff and solid than he seems on screen. He seems very slight of build, but is very muscular. Again, this is one of those things that does not come across on screen. It reminds me that we cannot always believe our eyes when it comes to celebs and their body types.