How tall was Lee Van Cleef

Lee Van Cleef's Height

6ft 2 (188 cm)

American actor best remembered for roles in films such as High Noon, For a Few Dollars More, The Good The Bad and the Ugly, Sabata, Death Rides a Horse, The Big Gundown, Escape from New York, Code Name: Wild Geese, The Nebraskan, The Magnificent Seven Ride and Ride Lonesome.
I'm six-feet two, weigh around one-ninety, two hundred, I'm fairly well put together.
Lee was well over six feet tall, a huge man, powerful. And like a wild boar, he had a cold, calculating look. Even when the cameras weren't rolling, he was an intimidating figure. - William Shatner

How tall is Lee Van Cleef

You May Be Interested

Height of Lee Marvin
Lee Marvin
6ft 1 (185 cm)
Height of John Wayne
John Wayne
6ft 3 ¾ (192 cm)
Height of Charles Bronson
Charles Bronson
5ft 8 ¾ (175 cm)
Height of Clint Eastwood
Clint Eastwood
6ft 0 (183 cm)

Add a Comment147 comments

Average Guess (91 Votes)
6ft 1.86in (187.6cm)
Leone_Fan said on 26/Sep/23
Loved the show he did from the 80s, The Master. Van Cleef was about 60 I think but looked 70. Lee Van Cleef died way back in 1989 at the age of 64 which by modern standards isn't really that old. Its funny there wasn't much difference in age between him and Clint Eastwood when they starred together. 6'2'' or thereabouts seems a safe bet.
Slamm said on 27/Aug/23
Peak 6-2. Didn’t lose a massive amount in old age.
Bradley said on 23/Aug/22
6-2 but those boots made Clint and Lee giants with those Sergio ground up shots he loved to shoot.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Aug/22
Watch Kansas City Confidential Rampage from 1952, there's a scene with John Payne in it, definitely not the same height.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 22/Aug/22
Not less than 6ft2, too close to Clint
Becheese said on 9/Aug/22
Can’t see a peak under 6-2. Legit
QM6'1.5"QM said on 5/Jul/22
«The Good The Bad and the Ugly» is the greatest western action movie of 20th century!
Great music soundtrack too!

He was 6'2" guy, the average guess is his low&evening height!
Voorhees Myers said on 3/Jul/22
Looks a 6-2 guy peak.
Sobo said on 17/Jun/22
Lee Van Cleef movies never disappoint. The spaghetti westerns he ran were true blue and awesome. He was a put together brother. Just my two cents, 🎵Bum bum bum bum bum bum bum!🎶
Sinclair said on 3/Jun/22
This guy never struck me as a full 6’2”. 6’1.5” probably more likely; 6’3.5” Eastwood had about two inches on Van Cleef and Sheb Wooley (listed in places as 6’1.5”!) seemingly edged out Van Cleef in High Noon.
Hong said on 4/May/22
He's actually only 5 years older than Eastwood and was only in his very early 40s in their movies together,but I do agree there was a slight difference in height with Eastwood having the edge,but only by max 1 inch.
Tech noir said on 1/May/22
Looks 1” under Eastwood in the westerns. And he wasn’t a young guy then. Legit 6-2” guy.
Joehughes said on 4/Mar/22
Seems near Eastwood's height as Angel Eyes the Bad.
V for 1984 said on 9/Dec/21
6-2 definitely peak.
Myers Haddonfield said on 4/Nov/21
6-2 on the mark imo. Clint always edged him out. Both big guys even for today’s world. Clint actually was bigger than Muhammad Ali. Looked a legit bigger guy. LVC also a large guy in his prime.
Iamfrench said on 18/Aug/21
6'2 without shoes
Tall Sam said on 27/Jul/21
Nope, never looked taller than Clint Eastwood, the latter looked pretty consistently over an inch taller IMO.
A Lawrence said on 25/Jul/21
Taller than Eastwood.
Dr Decker said on 29/Jun/21
Legit 6-2. Clint looked 1.5” taller
Joey Diaz said on 17/May/21
Definitely a legit 6’2
Hong said on 4/May/21
Click Here @Alan mctavish,yes indeed Lee was a tall man,Here's Lee face to face with 6ft4 George Kennedy,a 5ft10 guy even in cowboy boots would not look this tall compared to Kennedy.
Alan mctavish said on 28/Apr/21
I always could never really tell how tall lee van cleef was. Becouse i mostly always seen him in cowboy films with his hat on and those 2 inch boots. I guessesd he was 5' 10" to 6ft at most, he just didnt come across as any taller than 6ft. A thought he had a bad posture. So really if he was 5' 10" i wouldnt be suprised, but when i found out he was 6' 2" i never expected that! And a great actor!
Arch Stanton said on 9/Mar/21
Watch the film he was in with John Payne Hong, Cleef was noticebaly shorter than John Payne.
Hong said on 7/Mar/21
Click Here Lee measures up well next to Coburn and Walker here,he looks a solid 6ft2 in comparison,he looks taller than Coburn by an inch.
Miss Sandy Cowell said on 9/Jan/21
Lee Van Cleef, originally Clarence LeRoy Van Cleef, was born 96 years ago today. He passed away suddenly less than a month away from his 65th Birthday. Lee was suffering from throat cancer, but that was listed as a secondary cause of death, the main one believed to be a heart attack. 😢

He left behind four kids, two sons and two daughters.

6ft2. 💐

RIP Lee 🕯️ XXX
Soda machine said on 30/Dec/20
Legit 6-2.
Hong said on 10/Dec/20
Click Here Here's lee with 6ft2 listed John Payne,looks pretty similar.
Sinclair said on 17/Aug/20
I would estimate 6’1.75” for Van Cleef’s peak height. In High Noon, I recall 6’2” listed Sheb Wooley was a fraction taller than Van Cleef. I feel Clint Eastwood had roughly two inches on Van Cleef in For a Few Dollars More and The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Mar/20
Rangy 6ft2
Bob da cob. said on 23/Jan/20
Legit 6-2. 1” or more shorter than Eastwood
Arch Stanton said on 28/Aug/19
No chance he was the same height as John Payne Rob, see his early films, I suspect he wore lifts or thicker soles later on.
Hopping hopper said on 10/Aug/19
6-2 guy. Legit.
Arch Stanton said on 6/Aug/19
Definitely shorter than John Payne...
Junior Hernandez 1990 said on 26/Mar/19
Click Here He make it 6'2 before his death in this late 80s clip on Johnny Carson show. Only problem was his hair line turn less and grey.
AntMan said on 21/Feb/19
6'2 sounds right. A tall guy - not much difference between him and Clint Eastwood in the Dollars movies and looked slightly taller than James Coburn 6'1.5 listed James Coburn when they appeared together in an episode of Western series Cheyenne where they both got towered over by 6'6inch Clint Walker.
movieguy12 said on 12/Jun/18
I agree with the listing. Always given as 6'2'' and looked it. What surprises me about Van Cleef is that he was a relatively young man when filming the spaghetti westerns that made him famous. He was 40 years old I believe when filming For A Few Dollars More. Only 5 years older than the star Clint Eastwood although he looked old enough to be his father in that movie. A brilliant screen presence, someone you'd want to watch even in a not so great film.
even said on 26/Dec/17
the ultimate specimen of a man , he was six foot two , but don't think he was under 180 pounds .
Richard said on 9/Nov/17
Van Cleef didn't quite look 6'2" in early films, more 6'1.5". In "Escape from New York" in 1980 he looked about 6'1" even.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Oct/17
Still looked near this in Escape From New York w/h Kurt Russell
Duffer 5ft 11 said on 8/Oct/17
Never looked overly tall, but in those early NOIR movies he certainly did look a weak 6'2". Certainly held his own with such greats as Elam, Foster, Eastwood and the like. He did look to be a weak 6'1" in the 1980s.
James said on 18/Sep/17
He didn't look over 6'1" in earlier films. After he became a star in 1965 he began wearing lifts to look 6'3" in westerns.
Rory said on 14/Sep/17
Hard to see why someone like him would wear lifts. Let's say worst case scenario he was a 6ft1.5-75 guy. For his generation that's the equivalent of a strong 6ft3 today at least. That doesn't mean he didn't wear them more just to say he didn't need to.
PLB said on 31/Jul/17
I had hurt my foot so my doctor recommended I might try lifts. I ordered a wide range of them. I tried the big ones. I'm six four so I really didn't need them but walking around being six seven made me feel wonderful. I truly felt manly and dominant. A complete stranger came up to me and asked me how tall I was. It was great - except after just a few minutes my back was killing me. I had to take them off.

So if Van Cleef is wearing lifts - my compliments. He's a brave man.
James said on 14/Apr/17
Van Cleef wore a wig in "God's Gun" so I don't see why he wouldn't wear lifts too. I think the weight gain may have made him lose height, he did look quite fat in the two Israeli westerns with Garrett.
Richard said on 6/Apr/17
Van Cleef wore lifts in the two westerns he starred in with Leif Garrett.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Apr/17
6'1.5 I would guess without lifts, see his early films for his true height. See Kansas City Confidential or The Nebraskan with John Payne and Philip Carey.
Ian C said on 30/Mar/17
Van Cleef was two inches shorter than Clint Eastwood in For a Few Dollars More, and roughly the same height as Eastwood in The Good the Bad and the Ugly. So obviously Clint Eastwood shrank.
Larry@ said on 21/Jan/17
Lee Van Cleef is an old actor.He gave a very unofficial interview.He probably measured when he was more than 50yo.When he was 20yo Was definitely taller.I think 189-190cm.
thanasis t said on 15/Jan/17
6'1" sounds very low for him.If he wore lifts,then all of western actors wore.With Eastwood,Marvin,Coburn,Palance he looked 189 to me and 188 sometimes.Maybe in the 80s' he lost some height being down to 6'1" zone.
James said on 15/Jan/17
Van Cleef was 6'1" without lifts.
thanasis t said on 9/Jan/17
I think that 6'2" was his minimum.Rob is 6'2.25"-6'2.5" possible for him?
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 26/Nov/16
He was probably 6ft3+ in those boots while Eastwood was 6ft5+
Sandy Cowell said on 25/Nov/16
@ James - Hello! Thank for saying "only 55!" I'm only 55 and I feel bloody ancient!
The Horse of FUNK said on 25/Nov/16
Love the spaghetti western Dollar trilogy. Never realized how tall Cleef was, though, but that's probably reasonable when your co-star is 6'4" Clint Eastwood. 188-189cm afternoon/evening fits Cleef.

Here he is on the Johnny Carson show in one of his last interviews, still looked about 4 inches taller than Carson: Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 25/Nov/16
Looked 188/189cm zone with Eastwood
James said on 24/Nov/16
He was only 55 in "Escape from New York" so he wouldn't have lost much height.
josh jeffords said on 12/Oct/16
Lee is a tough nut he looked very short in most parts of liberty valance but he was barely credited.
He looks a couple under prim clint who said he was 6 4 might have been both had tall lanky build but clint was bulkier maybe 20lbs.
He was in a cheesy scifi movie as a crack shooting corporal i think he looked maybe average.
He was taller than kurt who is clearly not a tall man may 5 9 but lee was old then.
Still looked tall into his later years id say 6 1 maybe .5 prime about 6 ft later had bad posture esp later in life.
Was a good actor who got type cast as a cruel or at least creepy bad guy I liked his good guy roles more.
James said on 11/Oct/16
Like Charles Bronson, Van Cleef increased in height after he became famous.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Oct/16
If people here think he was a legit 6'2.5 I suggest you watch Kansas City Confidential or The Nebraskan. Nothing over 6 ft 2 with John Payne and Philip Carey, in fact I thought he looked 187 with both of them!.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Oct/16
@James, definitely, you compare him in his 60s and 70s films to earlier 50s and he went from looking 6 ft 1 range to almost 6'3! I think his real height is actually around 187. seeing him in those early 50s westerns.
TJE said on 2/Jul/16
I heard he had one green eye and one blue eye, a trait he shared with a different branch of the Van Cleefs. Apparently, they live in the mountains a couple hours from me and they have freakish features. I'm not sure if they're freakishly short or tall; gotta read up on them again.
James said on 1/Jul/16
I think Van Cleef wore lifts in westerns like "Sabata" and "Storm Rider" as he looked close to 6'3" there.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 2/Jun/16
@Arch: In fairness, they probably were all wearing lifts in westerns
Arch Stanton said on 16/May/16
@ George O, I think Van Cleef wore lifts at times though to look a stronger 6'2". I've seen him in early westerns with John Payne and Philip Carey and there's absolutely no way he was taller than 6'2", in fact he could look 6'1 and change with both men!
James B said on 2/May/16
He didnt look like a muscular powerful man, he seemed quite thin if anything I though Eastwood I thought cut a more imposing figure.
George P. said on 1/May/16
Lee van cleef's peak height was 6ft 2.75in(190cm), i saw a video on youtube with him and james coburn who is 6ft2 and he looked about an inch taller
Arch Stanton said on 7/Apr/16
@Rampage See Kansas City Confidential or The Nebraskan. Difficult to argue over 6 ft 2 with John Payne and Philip Carey. In fact in some scenes he could look in 6 ft 1 range. Yet as you say in the westerns could look 189, a boost not impossible given that it was his job to look as badass and imposing as possible.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 5/Apr/16
Still looked this height with Kurt Russell in Escape From New York at 56. I reckon a fraction over at peak.

Click Here
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 5/Apr/16
A fraction over 6ft2 is what I'd have thought. Could look as little as 1in shorter than Eastwood at times.
Arch Stanton said on 18/Mar/16
Makes you wonder if he wore lifts in the westerns or had a little boost to look a bit more imposing. He can look 6'2.5 with John Philip Law in Death Rides a Horse. Now having seen him in early 50s films he looks noticeably taller in the later Spaghetti western ones.
Arch Stanton said on 5/Mar/16
Then there's comparison's like Click Here with Eastwood and he pulls off looking a strong 6'2!
Arch Stanton said on 5/Mar/16
In the end scene of Kansas City Confidential Payne actually looked an easy inch taller than Van Cleef... Now look at Payne with Reagan. Confusing...
Arch Stanton said on 5/Mar/16
Rob, to be honest I'm not sure on a full 6 ft 2 for van Cleef. Watch him in some of his early roles like Kansas City Confidential and The Nebraskan. He looks Lee Marvin sort of height next to both John Payne and Philip Carey. In some scenes Carey really looked between 2 and 3 inches taller. He didn't look under this with Eastwood but had on boots and not impossible a little advantage.
Editor Rob
a fraction shy of 6ft 2 isn't impossible
Arch Stanton said on 5/Mar/16
Mmmm, I saw Kansas City Confidential and Cleef definitely looked a bit shorter than John Payne. Now I've read 6'2.5 for Payne but I've seen a lot of his films and he never looked over 6'2 with guys like Randolph Scott and Ronald Reagan. Cleef really looks in 6 ft 1 range with him which is odd. Not impossible that he had a footwear boost with Eastwood to look more intimidating. If Cleef was 189 Rampage Payne was 6 ft 3 and Randolph Scott 6 ft 4.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Mar/16
He looked a very similar height and build to Sean Connery on screen I thought. That slender muscular build. Like Connery could look in 187-89cm range depending on the film.
Arch Stanton said on 4/Mar/16
@Rob, can you add "More" after "For a Few Dollars" and add a fullstop after Lonesome? Offhand Anthony Quinn or WIlliam Holden I don't think had photos last time I looked.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/16
Can you also squeeze in The Nebraskan, he really had a majorrole in that.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/16
Philip Carey had about two inches on him in The Nebraskan.
Arch Stanton said on 1/Mar/16
@Rob Can you add a photo and some more films? Sabata, Death Rides a Horse, The Big Gundown, Escape from New York, The Magnificent Seven Ride and Ride Lonesome? He was in some of the bigger films too like How the West was Won and The Young Lions but had more minor roles.
Editor Rob
yes, if there's any bigger names like Lee still not got a photo, it's worth reminding me.
Andrew M said on 1/Jul/15
@thebad7 says on 30/Jan/14 - Thanks very much for that! I'll have a look on You Tube. Not long ago I did see a documentary which spoke about Lee, and I was surprised to hear that his knee(s?) was actually injured in a near-fatal car accident maybe just halfway through his career. I think he and his wife took up something like painting & decorating for a while, before Sergio Leone cast him in Westerns, re-igniting his career. Hope I've remembered that right!
Bruno said on 26/May/15
Check 3rd photo down, the big fella looks to have a strong 2'' on him here.
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Apr/15
"Peak height was 6ft 2½in (189cm)"

Looked no less than that w/h Eastwood. He might have lost some height by the 80's. He didn't look this beside Kurt Russell in Escape From New York.
joelj said on 21/Feb/15
6' 2.5" peak
Thompson said on 4/Feb/15
I think people underestimate how tall 6' 2 is most men that height (unless they are very chunky) look noticeably tall especially to the average 5' 9-10 man.
Key said on 3/Feb/15
There was about an inch between him and Clint and that's being generous. There was little difference between Cleef and Mario Brega who is apparently meant to be 6'4".? I highly doubt it when there was barely 7 inches between Brega and Elli Wallach who was in the 5'7 range; if Wallach stood on his tip toes he could of easily been near eye level.
Arch Stanton said on 31/Jan/15
Disagree, 6'2" is the very most he could have been, like Marvin I'd have put him more at 187 if anything. If he was 6'3" Clint was 6'5!!
gez said on 31/Jan/15
Definitely taller, I would give him a possible 6'2 3/4. His height hasn't been looked into
that much for all we know he could be near 6'4" which wouldn't surprise me.
Jake: 1.84 m- 1.85 m said on 20/Dec/14
Similar size to Lee Marvin. He was a tall 6ft 2in.
Sam said on 24/Nov/14
I noticed in Escape from New York that he looked shorter than at peak, more six feet even. I'd say some height loss was possible but I think Russell was wearing some fairly large boots as Snake there to make him look closer in height.
mrbobh5344 said on 14/Nov/14
Van Cleef also looks the same height as Claude Akins (6'1") in Joe Dakato.
mrbobh5344 said on 6/Nov/14
I collect and rewatch western movies. In The Vanishing American (1955) there is a 'front on' porch scene where Forrest Tucker, Jim Davis, Lee van Cleef and John Dierkes stand side by side looking out at the street. By height from tallest to shorter it goes Tucker (6'4"), Dierkes (6'4-), Davis (6'2 +) and Van Cleef. Van Cleef is clearly shorter than Davis... Davis looks to have a bigger heeled boot... but allowing for that he still looks taller than Van Cleef. I believe Van Cleef was what you call a weak 6'2". Still tall... and in the range he claimed. Like 6'1 1/2".. claiming 6'2".
Paleman said on 3/Oct/14
He didn't look much shorter than Eastwood in the Dollars films. I wouldn't be surprised if his peak was a good 6'3" back in those days. Eastwood was definitely taller than him, but only by an edge.

I would say that Lee was 6'2" at absolute minimum, but 6'2" 1/2 - 6'3" seems more likely.
Sam said on 19/Sep/14
I saw part of a western I've never heard of, Barquero, definitely not a masterpiece! He did look this range, a couple inches under Forrest Tucker. Warren Oates was also in it but don't recall a height comparison. For some reason, they tried to slather a couple of hot ladies over Van Cleef and he was walking around shirtless a bunch, he had muscular arms and shoulders but seemed to move awkwardly like he was holding his gut in like Robert Mitchum! Loved the guy but to me he had a face like a bird of prey and was quite bald, not exactly Mr. handsome.
struggles said on 11/Sep/14
at 6'2 he was a whole man where I am merely half...I cant reach him with my cell phone, Ill try to telegraph. by sue n.
thebad7 said on 30/Jan/14
@Andrew M.:
If you can, you should see if you can find Lee's 1984 appearance on THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH JOHNNY CARSON. Lee was invited on as part of a promotional tour for THE MASTER, and he gave a great interview for Johnny in which he talked about how he got the part of Jack Colby--his first film role--in 1951 for the now classic Western, HIGH NOON. At the end of the interview, when Johnny was introducing the next guest (a young and very hot at the time actress), the guest slipped in her high heels, falling flat on her face, and Lee was up and out of his chair helping the girl up before anyone else moved. Not bad for a man known as "The Bad." ;) In regards to height: Lee was onstage at the same time as 6'4" Ed McMahon, and he only looked about 1" and bit of change shorter. Alongside his immaculate posture, LVC kept most of his height even to the end in 1989.

By the way: the 80s film you're talking about in which Lee starred with David Carradine is a 1986 Fred Olen Ray film titled ARMED RESPONSE. Yes, it's a B action film, but it's not without its charms, and Lee is great in it as Carradine's gruff and crusty retired police officer father. Although it's a good action film, I don't watch it often because it was around that time that Lee started appearing sickly--he suffered from heart disease the last seven years of his life--but it's the best the work he did in film post 1981.

Andrew M said on 20/Oct/13
I really came to like him in his sadly short-lived TV show "The Master". Reputedly he couldn't do too much of the kicking, as his knee (or knees?) was badly injured in a car crash. In fact, the bad guy in the show was played by Sho Kosugi, a well known martial arts star who is himself 5'10", and Sho said he often doubled for Lee when in his Ninja costume, "with half a rugby ball stuck on top of your head!" added the the interviewer for the martial arts magazine. Sho said Lee was a very nice man, which I can believe. He always seemed to be smiling on screen!
I think he must have been a bit of a martial arts fan himself, given that he appeared in Chuck Norris' "The Octagon"; a "martial arts Western" (as described by the TV guide) the name of which I can't recall, with a young Chinese guy and his girlfriend doing the martial arts stuff; and along with David Carradine in one of those straight-to-video shots, both playing a bodyguard / crime-fighting duo.
And say what you like about "The Master" being a naff '80s TV show (I don't agree, by the way!), it was still good enough to show off Lee's all round acting ability, including the humorous bits. Pity it didn't continue, with him finally finding his daughter, Terri. Thanks for all the fun, Lee!
thebad7 said on 10/Oct/13
Lee Van Cleef is one of the most underrated film actors of all time. He had a screen presence that rivaled even Eastwood's. He was minimum 6'2" tall--my best estimate for him is 6'2 1/2" (strong 6'2"). In the the finale of FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, he and Clint stand side by side as Monco returns the Colonel his dead sister's pocketwatch. Both men are wearing cowboy boots with similar heels. Eastwood has about 1.5" on Van Cleef, and I believe Eastwood was 6'4" in his prime (plenty of photographic evidence available to support this).

Another great example is 1956's IT CONQUERED THE WORLD. Van Cleef stands nose to nose with 6'3" co-star Peter Graves, and Graves just barely edges out Van Cleef--the difference is less than an inch. Likewise, in 1962's THE MAN WHO CONQUERED LIBERTY VALANCE, Van Cleef has about an inch on strong 6'1"/weak 6'2" Lee Marvin.

One note about Van Cleef: the man always had excellent posture that he kept up until his death in 1989. He never slouches in his films.

avi said on 29/Jul/13
looked tall next to 6'6-6'7 James Arness in Gunsmoke
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Jun/13
6"2.5"(189cm) is was what I saw next to Eastwood who I'm convinced was 6"4".
Not so sure about 6"3"+ though. The boots he wore mightve brought him to 6"4" while Clint would've been over 6"5" in them.
Tony said on 22/Apr/13
6'2" 1/2 without shoes.
Arch Stanton said on 10/Jan/13
On his official site "he" mentioned his height and weight. Rob, he died in 1989 before Internet even existed!
Editor Rob
it should have read, 'it' ;)
Winston said on 23/Jul/12
At least 6'2"
henry said on 11/Feb/12
he is a little taller than 6'1.5.barefot 6'2
Henrik said on 9/Feb/12
Richard says on 6/Feb/12
Looking at Van Cleef he looked much taller than 6'2". I'd say at his peak he might have been 6'3" 1/2. He towered over most of his costars and there was little difference between him and Eastwood. He may have shrunk down to 6'2" 1/2 or 6'2" later in life.

Not impossibe, I suppose. Maybe he did state a "shrinked" height?
PKB said on 7/Feb/12
Rob, could you please add The Good, the Bad and the Ugly in the introduction of Lee Van Cleef?
Editor Rob
yeah, I'm slowly over the next year refreshing the descriptions a bit more.
Richard said on 6/Feb/12
Looking at Van Cleef he looked much taller than 6'2". I'd say at his peak he might have been 6'3" 1/2. He towered over most of his costars and there was little difference between him and Eastwood. He may have shrunk down to 6'2" 1/2 or 6'2" later in life.
MR.HEIGHT said on 25/Jan/12
a strong 6' 2". makes me wanna smoke a pipe. cant wait for the remake of death rides a horse.
jake, 1.82 m/ 1.83 m said on 9/Jan/12
Lee could well have been 6" 2.25 (1.89 m) at his peak.
Henrik said on 24/Nov/11
If he said 6'2" himself, then that's very likely what he also was.
LAN JIAO said on 16/Nov/11
correction. lee van cleef peak 6'2.75-6'3.25
Sentenza said on 9/Nov/11
I don't think there was a big height difference between Eastwood and Van Cleef. Probable an inch at the most. Van Cleef always looked very tall to me. I think without shoes he's probably about 6'3". With the Cowboy boots he towers over most characters in his movies.
LAN Jiao said on 6/Nov/11
peak clint - 6'3.75-6'4.25, now unknown.
peak van cleef 6'2-6'3.25
thebad7 said on 4/Nov/11
@Jiao The Troll: You don't know jack, son. "I know well how legit 6'4" guy looks..."--with your incoherent ramblings and idiotic claims, you can't be trusted to know anything about ANYTHING. You have ZERO credibility. You're a joke.

WRONG. Clint isn't six flat today. Epic Fail--though that's a recurring motif for you.

Do yourself a favor: L I T E R A C Y. You have no business posting here, or anywhere else, loser.

I'm done dealing with you and your ridiculous claims. You need help.


"im min 6'5.3"...with your interpretation of height, no doubt six-foot-five-inches in your mind equates to 5'3". Seek help.
LAN Jiao said on 4/Nov/11
tb7, i"ll pay back clint 1 inch at peak as previously i say 188-189cm range before. he look more 6'3 range with a hair 6'4 cos he did't look near 6'7 so far i see in pictures w 2-3in cowboy boots. 6'4 myth i"ll do some verified from his hey day films. anyway on vinnie jones page i left out to tell you my english is not my priority language as from my dad is chinese,mum german, 3rd comes english. sorry for my english to anyone if i did't sounds like a good english speakers to make more understanding here.
my bad for clint height, i should watch more of his earlier days film and post comments here. he does look lost alot height and develope the hump makes him 5'11 alone in pictures. stand tall i think his 6'0 now.
LAN Jiao said on 3/Nov/11
lol.. im min 6'5.3 and i know well how legit 6'4 guy looks..
actors height can be inflated or exagerrated, common sense.. claim height claim does't mean real height. listed height does't goes same as claim height.
whatever clint height at peak.. he is dead on 6'0-5'11.25 min nowadays. wonder why a healthy old men loss 4 plus inches height.. weir.. my granpa 3years shy of clint age is still 5'8 and 5'9 peak and my grandpa 81yr old cousin legit 6'2 while near 6'4 peak..
thebad7 said on 31/Oct/11
@Jiao: I am trying my very best to refrain from being a total dick towards you, but your off-the-wall, inaccurate, and outrageous claims prohibit that. You aren't good at judging height at all. You also need to get over this hang-up you harbor regarding men taller than yourself.

Lee Van Cleef was a tall, well-built man and he remained in top physical shape up until the last few years of his life due to heart disease and--in the last year of his life--throat cancer. Even up to his death in December 1989, the man had excellent, military-style posture and he lost very little height if any at all.

He co-starred with Eastwood in '65 and '66 for PER QUALCHE DOLLARO IN PIU and IL BUONO, IL BRUTTO, IL CATTIVO. Both men wore cowboy boots with 1" - 1 1/2" heels. A young Eastwood had an inch on Van Cleef--up to 1 1/2" at the most. Van Cleef was a tall guy and so was Eastwood, and Eastwood was noticeably taller than Van Cleef.

1965 - 1966
Clint Eastwood: 6'4" barefoot at ages 35 and 36. He ALWAYS looked 6'4" in the '60s. He was the same height as 6'4" actors George Kennedy and Gregory Walcott in the '70s. Always noticeably taller than legit 6'2" - 6'3" actors even into the '90s. Deal with it.
Lee Van Cleef: minimum 6'2" barefoot, as high as 6'2 1/2" or weak 6'3" at ages 40 and 41. ALWAYS noticeably taller than 6'1" and 6'2" actors and appearing same height or a fraction shorter than 6'3" - 6'4" actors. Van Cleef was tall. Deal with it.

And so ends the lesson. You really need to watch the finale of PER QUALCHE DOLLARO IN PIU again when The Colonel and Monco stand side-by-side before parting ways. It's as plain and clear as daylight: Eastwood IS TALLER than Van Cleef. If you think that Eastwood was the same height as Van Cleef, then you must have some sort of depth perception problem to round out your litany of handicaps.

LAN Jiao said on 30/Oct/11
Cleef at peak is no shorter than "6-4" clint eastwood. Both 6'2 peak reality height
Sam said on 19/Oct/11
The shortest I ever saw Van Cleef look was in Escape from NY where he looked no more than 2 inches over Kurt Russell, although you have to bear in mind that Van Cleef may have lost some height and Russell wore some seriously chunky boots when playing Snake Plissken.
thebad7 said on 17/Oct/11
I recently watched Lee Van Cleef in 1976's GOD'S GUN and in 1967's DEATH RIDES A HORSE. In the former, Lee stars alongside strong 6'3" Jack Palance, and he looks the same height as Palance. In the latter--one of Van Cleef's finest non-Leone Westerns--Van Cleef looks only 2" shorter than 6'5" John Phillip Law. In each film, the actors all wear cowboy boots with 1" - 1 1/2" heels. Watching his films, it's easy to see how tall he really was, and I maintain that he looked even taller because he always had excellent posture--Van Cleef was never a sloucher. 6'2" at the minimum, even at the end when he died in 1989.

@Peter: He's my favorite screen actor, and I own almost all of his films (1952-1989). Having watched his stuff so much over the years, I'm at a point where I'm ready to guess 6'3" at his peak as well. Also saw him in a great B sci-fi flick from 1956 titled IT CONQUERED THE WORLD. Next to 6'3" Peter Graves, Van Cleef looks the same height (both men are wearing dress shoes) at Graves, with Graves having just a hair advantage on LVC--no more than 1/2" difference between the men. You're right: he always looks tall on screen.

Peter said on 7/Oct/11
He always looks very tall on screen. I would say 6'3". Perhaps 6'3" at his peak.
Mike said on 25/Sep/11
He looks taller than Sean Connery. He seems about 6'3". He has a powerful presence.
Shaun said on 10/Jul/11
He looked the exact same height on screen to Sean Connery. 6'1.5"-6'2" range.
Gonzalo said on 28/Mar/11
In The man who shot Liberty Valance he looks short when he faces Wayne at the bar, right after the duel with Valance. Wayne looks 4-5 cms taller but he looks much bigger than Van Cleef. The funny thing is Wayne looks shorter than James Stewart. Height is a mistery.
jtm said on 3/Mar/11
the only time he didn't look 6'2 was next to kurt russell.
thebad7 said on 24/Feb/11
I posted earlier today, and to satisfy my curiosity, I popped in a Eurocrime film from 1978 that Lee Van Cleef starred in titled THE SQUEEZE. In it, Van Cleef stars as a master safecracker goaded into taking one last job for a big payday. Wonderful, obscure crime caper.

In any event, Van Cleef stars alongside Lionel Stander and Edward Albert (son of famed Eddie Albert). Both Stander and Albert are listed at 6' from reliable sources. There are scenes in the film during which Van Cleef is standing side-to-side with both of his co-stars. Everybody is wearing similar footwear--either cowboy boots or platform shoes. Van Cleef has at least 2" on both Stander and Albert, and he has excellent posture--as he always had throughout his life.

There is one scene during which Van Cleef walks through the lobby of a NYC hotel--he is dressed in Western garb with cowboy boots with (approximately) 2" heels. Here he towers over everybody in the lobby--he's about 6'4" with the boots on. After watching the film, I am certain that Van Cleef was at least 6'2" tall, and possibly a bit over that mark. Bottom line: no less than 6'2" for Van Cleef.


P.S.--I am biased: he's my favorite film actor of all-time.
thebad7 said on 24/Feb/11
I caught THE BRAVADOS on Encore Westerns the other night. In an early scene, Peck views the four suspected killers in the holding cell. I agree with poster PatB: Steven Boyd looked a bit shorter than the others, but Van Cleef looked to be the same height as Henry Silva, Albert Salmi, and Gregory Peck with no discernable difference between them all. Van Cleef was a tall guy--6'2" is spot on, especially since he looked even taller in cowboy boots.

Another good judge of Van Cleef's height is 1956's IT CONQUERED THE WORLD. In it, there are scenes in which Van Cleef stands face-to-face with his 6'3" co-star Peter Graves, and to my eye, Van Cleef is about the same height as Graves--or just a hair (less than 1") shorter. Bear in mind, both actors are wearing similar footwear--standard dress shoes. More proof resides with 1962's THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE. Lee Marvin was billed at 6'2", and he looks to be very close to this measurement--but in scenes together, Van Cleef looks to be about an inch taller. Also, in the final two Dollars Films, Van Cleef looks to be about 1"-1.5" shorter than a young, 6'4" Clint Eastwood; again, both men wearing cowboy boots with 1.5"-2" heels.

Van Cleef always had very good posture--even towards the end of his life. He was a terrific actor with an awesome voice--and that squint was more effective than a hundred pages of dialogue. Anything less than 6'2" for Van Cleef is ridiculous.

PatB said on 26/Dec/10
I'm posting again because I watched "The Bravados" last night on Roku. There's a scene in which Gregory Peck has the sheriff line up the four killers in the jail cell - all four of them are about the same height as Peck, including Van Cleef. I was a bit surprised that Van Cleef was that tall. Albert Salmi was a bit taller and Steven Boyd a bit shorter but Van Cleef, Henry Silva and Peck are all about 6'2". Overall it's a tall cast with Andrew Duggan at 6'6" playing a very big priest. BTW it's a terrific flic. Peck is awesome.
Yaspaa said on 11/May/09
6'0 for Marvin and 6'1 for Van Cleef. Comparing these guys against other guys is no good because we dont really know their heights either,Eastwood was never 6'4 either,he's lost 3" riiiight.
Ed T. said on 14/Nov/08
Adam,I agree that Van Cleef and Marvin were probably very similar in height, with the slight edge probably going to Van Cleef. If I remember correctly, Van Cleef appeared maybe slightly taller than Marvin in "Liberty Valence".

I just finished watching " The Professionals " 1966, with Lee Marvin, Robert Ryan , Burt Lancatser, Ralph Bellamy, Jack Palance and Woody Strode. I know that you are a big Robert Ryan fan and I think you would like the film. In the film there are several scenes where Ryan is standing right next to or right behind Lee Marvin. At least in my view, Ryan is a good two or two and a half inches taller than Marvin. I know that you agree that by 1966, Ryan was most likely no taller than 6'3.5". Marvin also looks only slightly taller than 62 year old Ralph Bellamy, who was probably around 6'0"-6'0.5" at that time.
There is also a photo shown in the beginning of the movie in which Marvin is standing very close to Jack Palance. Palance looks about three inches taller than Marvin in the picture.

I still believe Lee Marvin 6'1.25" to 6'1.5" and Lee Van Cleef 6'1.5 to 6'1.75"
adam said on 8/Oct/08
Ed, you are right. Robert Ryan was 6-4 when he was a young man but by The Dirty Dozen he was maximum 6-3
Bob H. said on 26/Aug/08
I have a copy of "The Vanishing American" from Republic, 1955. There are 2 scenes where Forrest Tucker (6'4") and Jim Davis (6'2 1/2" and Van Cleef stand side by side. In that order. I have it paused on one of those scenes right now. Looks like Tucker wears comfortable low healed boots. He is a bear. Davis wears a high healed boot. I believe it was the style he liked. He was an excellent horseman. I don't think he was concerned with height. He had it. Van cleef is wearing a higher saddle boot also. Davis is about an inch shorter than Tucker (Davis is shorter but has the advantage of a bigger heal). Van Cleef looks 2 inches shorter than Davis. Throughout the film this is true. Put Van Cleef at 6'1"and give Davis the advantage of the higher healed boot... and you have about 2 inches. I peg Van Cleef at 6'1". But I also think he became well aware of image, the tall menacing type he was cast as and did what was necessary to appear taller later in the 60's and 70's.
Ed T. said on 16/Aug/08
Frank2, I never met Van Cleef, but based on his film work, I find it hard to believe that he was close to 6'3". I could possibly buy 6'2" for Van Cleef, but not close to 6'3". If he was, then George Kennedy would have been an easy 6'5" as well as Clint Eastwood. I could see Kennedy being possibly a hair over 6'4" and cannot see Eastwood being any taller than 6'4" flat and most likely more like 6'3.5". Again, I never met Van Cleef or Marvin, but I don't believe my opinions are nonsense. Regarding Marvin, when looking at "The Dirty Dozen" , I see a good two inches difference between Marvin and Robert Ryan and a similar difference between Marvin and Donald Sutherland ( look at the scene where Sutherland impersonates a General and does a mock inspection of Ryan's troops. As they stand side by side it is clear that Marvin is noticeably shorter than both, not by one inch or even 1.5 inches, but by at least a solid two inches.) Now, if Ryan and Sutherland were 6'4.25" to 6'4.5" tall , then I would say without a doubt Marvin was a solid 6'2". However, I believe both Ryan and Sutherland were no taller than 6'3.5" in 1966/67 and maybe even closer to 6'3".
Also, please take a look at the picture of Marvin and Keenan Wynn posted by Dave on the Marvin Page on July 9th. Marvin sure doesn't look a full 6'2" in that picture with Keenan Wynn.
Frank2 said on 12/Aug/08
Nonsense. I met him and he was close to 6'3". Marvin was a solid 6'2" I met him as well. I'm 5'11" and looked up at both men. They were both several inches taller than me.

James Mason was a close friend of my dad. I saw him a lot growing up. I knew his daughter Portland. She even wrote me a love letter back when she was about four years old! Sadly, she died a few years ago. After my dad passed away, I ran into Mason later on when I was an adult. He was 5'11". Same height as me. And the last time I saw him was six months before he died. He was still 5'11".
Ed T. said on 17/Jul/08
I agree Yaspaa. I think Van Cleef was 6'1" to 6'1.5". Seemed to be the same height or slightly taller than Lee Marvin .
Yaspaa said on 7/Jul/08
I saw him in a movie with James Mason who is listed at 5'11,he looked 2" taller aso maybe 6'1. He looked about an inch taller than David Carradine in a recentish movie.
teo said on 10/Jan/08
I read 1,82 for volonte.It's more realistic than 1,87.
tom said on 22/Jun/07
Glenn,do you know the height of gianmaria Volontè?(i read 187 but i'm not sure).
He played in the first and the second of the trilogy of Leone.
Brad said on 20/Mar/07
6' 2" but keep in mind, he wore cowboy boots that add 2-3 inches more. Friend of mine saw him at Crash Corrigan's restaurant in Thousand Oaks years ago....the guy still looked like he was ready to pull out the pistol.
val said on 16/Mar/07
I don't care what's the exact height of Lee Van Cleef. What's important to me is that he was the sexiest and straight-legged man I have ever seen in western movies. I wish he was still alive! Clint is cute too!
Glenn said on 4/Jan/07
I saw Eastwood look 6-4 in dress shoes, closer to 6ft.
CC-Tron said on 3/Jan/07
I think Eastwood looked 6'4 with cowboy boots. Without them he looked closer 6'2. Van Cleef looks 6'2 with boots and was probably 6'0 without them.
chris said on 2/Jan/07
Eastwood was a solid 6'4 in his film 'A Fistful of Dollars', i'd put van cleef at about 6'2
Stephen said on 15/Sep/06
Clint Eastwood 6' 3"
Lee Van Cleef 6' 1.5"
mcfan said on 14/Apr/06
In an interview, Lee Van Cleef stated that Clint was taller than him. In "Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" Clint sure looked taller by a couple of inches.
sf said on 27/Mar/06
No, I don't think he was than Clint taller in "Good, Bad and the Ugly" or "For a Few Dollars More". I think 6'1" or 6'2" is about right. I've read Clint was 6'3" or 6'4". I believe 6'3" was probably his real height and 6'4" in shoes.
Johnny said on 25/Mar/06
Yeah,but in The Good,the Bad and the Ugly he was taller than Eastwood?
Anonymous said on 21/Feb/06
I don't think he was as tall as 6'2." He was 2 or 3 inches shorter than Clint in For a Few Dollars More. If Clint was 6'4", Lee was maybe 6'1.5." But if Clint was shorter than 6'4," Lee was probably under 6'1."

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

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

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