How tall was Paul Newman

Paul Newman's Height

5ft 9 ½ (176.5 cm)

American actor best remembered for roles in films such as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Sting, Cool Hand Luke, The Hustler, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, The Verdict, The Hudsucker Proxy, Hombre, The Color of Money and Road to Perdition. In a 1986 NY Post article it mentioned Newman wouldn't reach 5ft 11, except in heels, and would offer $1000 to charity for every inch over 5ft 8 Paul measured. Mr Newman replied that he'd be willing to write a $500,000 cheque if he was indeed 5ft 8, but if they were wrong, then they'd give $25,000 to charity for every quarter inch over 5ft 8 he measured. The NY Post never took up the bet. His weight was mentioned in a Ladies Home Journal: "At five feet ten inches, he carries 165 pounds with a taut strength".

Paul Newman's Height
Photo by MGM, via Wikimedia Commons
Paul was a little bit more difficult to work with, though, because I was taller than him. In all our scenes standing together, I had to be barefoot.
- Melanie Griffith in 1975

You May Be Interested

Height of Joanne Woodward
Joanne Woodward
5ft 4 (163 cm)
Height of Robert Redford
Robert Redford
5ft 9 (175 cm)
Height of Marlon Brando
Marlon Brando
5ft 8 ¾ (175 cm)
Height of Steve McQueen
Steve McQueen
5ft 9 ¾ (177 cm)

Add a Comment419 comments

Average Guess (55 Votes)
5ft 8.87in (174.9cm)
Tall Sam said on 4/Sep/19
I know people claim in the comments that they saw him as a frail very small man like 5'7" or under in person, but I had the pleasure of seeing on stage in his last role, I believe, in Our Town and thought with some partially known actors (like Jeffrey DeMunn) Newman could still look 5'8" and change despite being in his late 70s.
Bradley said on 7/Aug/19
As listed in '69.
Kevin Kryven said on 6/Aug/19
My dad met Paul Newman in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin in 1968 when he was making *Winning* (1969). Newman was about 43 years old at the time, and my dad said he was only 5'7" tall and very slight and skinny.
David Curtin said on 3/Jul/19
@Tom we will all look bad at the end if we had cancer , what an insensitive comment ..
David Curtin said on 3/Jul/19
Look at Cruise and Newman here , Cruise would have lifts on Click Here
Karen Madriz said on 5/Apr/19
Was standing close to him when he raced west palm beach in 83...he was in racing flat shoes...he may be 5ft. 7 inches
Sandy Cowell said on 26/Jan/19
πŸŽˆπŸŽ‚πŸ˜ Happy Birthday Paul! πŸ˜πŸŽ‚πŸŽˆ

Paul would have turned 94 today.

Have a lovely day in Heaven!

Paul can have a Birthday guess of 5ft9.
Rising - 174 cm said on 30/Oct/18
@David: I agree with you on Newman's height and the difference did vary, but it's important to remember Cruise wore 2" Cuban heels in that film while Newman had normal shoes closer to an inch. Newman did still look fit, but a half inch loss was possible by then because Newman wound up shrinking a lot by his late 70's/early 80's. I'd give Cruise about 5'7.5" barefoot.
greg lehmann said on 29/Oct/18
I think Paul Newman would be happy if he heard his 1966 Sir Alfred Hitchcock Torn Curtain made my Christmas list! (Just for balancing out the heavyweight Torn Curtain theme the lighter weight Hitchcock movie The Trouble With Harry made it as well.) From having seen Torn Curtain every year in high school in my German classes I found this was Hitchcock's last really strong movie but he sacked composer Bernard Hermann for using an overly somber theme when Hitchcock wanted Beatles music played in the movie! Still a solid Hitchcock mystery.
Dean Smallwood said on 29/Oct/18
I was part of a press gaggle in Baton Rouge while Newman was filming "Blaze". I stood immediately next to him and could look down on the top of his head. He was wearing simple street shoes and couldn't have been more than 5'8".I'm 6'1".
David duFresne said on 25/Oct/18
Just finished rewatching the Color of Money, the height difference between Cruise and Newman varies throughout the film, but at most, Newman looks 2 inches taller. Of course he was in his early 60s then, but he looked pretty fit and I doubt he lost even a half an inch. I think 5'9 1/2 at peak, maybe even a solid 5'9, but no less you can tell he wasn't a short man by his proportions. I'm a touch over 5'7 and you can tell I'm short even when I'm alone in a picture because the proportions are a bit off. If I were to be able to bet on the heights they were in the film, I'd give 5'7 3/4 for Cruise and 5'9 1/4 for Newman.
Ruben Bosco said on 3/Sep/18
5 ft 9 peak
Shar said on 6/Aug/18
Five nine sounds about right. The most handsome man ever seen in the movies.
Zachary Bode said on 4/Aug/18
Always looked 5'9" range.
Caaq said on 22/Jun/18
He is looking 6 feet in shoes. So 5 10 should be the height. Click Here
Croaker1 said on 1/May/18
I was part of a press gaggle in Baton Rouge, La. on the set of "Blaze" and stood right next to Newman. I could look down on the top of his head. I'm 6'1'' and know that Newman was no more than 5"8" with his shoes on.
Greg99 said on 2/Apr/18
He honestly looks about 5'10 on the Cavett show next to 5'6" Dick Cavett
JJJ said on 1/Mar/18
@Liz Steen: If Newman was 5'9 there wouldn't have been much difference between him and your dad as 2 inches isn't a lot so he was fairly average.
Liz Steen said on 25/Jan/18
My dad, who was 5 ft 11, always told me the story about the time he saw Pail Newman in the airport. They were at a revolving book kiosk together and my dad said and I quote β€œhe was a little guy” and I asked him how tall and he said 5’8, maybe 5’9. If Joanne Woodward is 5’4, the pictures of them together look about right for the height my dad thought he was.
Rising - 174 cm said on 10/Jan/18
Babette, he'd have shoes in the mugshot, so about 5'10" in shoes, sure. Significant growth after 18 is rare, but you're right, it does happen (e.g., Ralph Macchio, Leo DiCaprio). A newspaper interview in 1986 said 5'10.5" for Newman so I could believe he was that height in shoes and about 5'9.25"-5'9.5" without. He shrunk a lot after 70, though.
Babette said on 31/Dec/17
LOL, the arguments are silly, the Navy "mugshots" (is there a better word for it than that?) tell all. He was 5'10" in the first one, and 6' in the second. The first one is obviously the more accurate of the two, the second is very slightly distorted to make him seem taller - although I do not discount that he might have added an inch in the service. Very juvenile men can add height after age 18 (Costner did, I know men who grew after high school). I saw him a couple of times in Westport and he looked to me to be about 5'10". 5'5" - ridiculous. More important to me is the physical perfection shown in the mugshots. No makeup, no lighting, just a young guy being photographed - OMG. What a handsome fellow!
Ally N said on 24/Dec/17
I always thought as a kid Newman, McQueen and Redford looked pretty much the same. Paul Newman could look shorter because he slouched in character for his roles. He and Steve McQueen looked the same in Towering Inferno, 1974. He and R. Redford looked the same in Butch Cassidy...both wearing cowboy boots. In the movie The Sting, Paul's posture is poor.
borntrip said on 10/Nov/17
melanie griffith, probably a little bit confused as a teenager at the time... Δ± have seen that movie-drowning pool and newman was definitely taller... not much taller but tall enough to verify the 1.77 claim if she is about 5 ft 8...well, the difference may have been considered as "not enough" by the director or the producers and that may be a reason for her barefoot shots... hard to say the exact thing behind all that...
Joey said on 26/Aug/17
I'd say 5'8.25."
Rising - 174 cm said on 5/Aug/17
Newman could look near 5'10" at times in The Sting, he was noticeably taller than James Dean and I do believe he claimed 5'10.5" to a journalist, so this listing is possible, but I think he was more a strong 5'9"/176 cm than 176.5. I'll be watching quite a few of his films again soon as he did a number of great ones in different genres.
RisingForce said on 21/Jun/17
What year was that, Robert? I do think Paul was 5'9" peak, maybe a bit over at 176 cm, but he shrunk A LOT. By his mid to 70s, he was closer to 5'7.5" and when he got to about 80 and his final years, he was 5'7" at best or under. Add in old man posture and you may have seen a short Newman later, but if you're claiming this was in his prime then nobody will believe it. Paul was definitely over 5'8" when he was younger. Look at him with Marlon Brando and James Dean.
Robert Page said on 3/Jun/17
Poppycock.!! I was in an elevator at NIH (in Bethesda, Maryland)with Paul Newman purely by chance. I was there to make a few bucks as a clinical trial "genea pig"..I was shocked that I was standing next to this hollywood icon AND that I was taller than he was ! I am only 5ft 8in..and I was looking ACROSS the top of his baseball style cap..He was accompanied by a heavyset woman in a red blazer..who I believe was part of Central Casting's PR division..I had always thought Paul was 6ft or taller..I had read that shorter male movie stars would wear high-heeled boots orstand on steps or high dirt mounds to give the illusion of height...Later I read that he was at NIH for cancer treatments.
RisingForce said on 26/May/17
Looks like Newman was still in his Navy uniform for that one. So does this mean he wasn't above 5'9" or that the image is too distorted to draw any conclusions from?
Editor Rob: I think he's too far in front of the chart and the camera is quite close...
RisingForce said on 23/May/17
Rob, what about the mugshot taken after he was out of the Navy at age 21? Click Here Wouldn't a mugshot only add height and not take it away? 5'9" flat seems to fit better with that as well as the fact Newman was a bit shorter than McQueen and he was struggling with 5'7" around age 80. Great actor, but I think a slim build and cowboy boots helped. His good friend Redford still looks 5'9" or so at age 80.
Editor Rob: the other Mugshot of newman showed a distinct difference compared to the first one...it is certainly adding height, 2-3 inches quite easily because of how close the camera will be (and it isn't above his eyelevel so will add some height).
RisingForce said on 29/Apr/17
Also, Newman looked like he shrunk to 5'7" max, possibly shorter, which I believe suggests more 5'9" flat as well since I see no reason why Newman would shrink 2.5"-3" by age 80.
RisingForce said on 29/Apr/17
I agree with 175 cm for Newman, but I think Bronson was 175 cm as well and McQueen looked to edge out Newman as you see in my post below, plus McQueen apparently measured 5'9.5"(176.5 cm). The thing that makes me suspect Newman could have been a bit taller is where would Newman get the 5'10.5" figure from if not a shoe height? In any event, he didn't look that tall in shoes in his mugshot, though and that was after he was done growing so 5'9" on the nose for Newman is likely imo, maybe 176 cm on the high side.
RichardSpain said on 27/Apr/17
Pawl Newman was a perfect 175cm, he had good looks and he was thin this help very much. 177 with his footwear is possible. Not more. He had same height than Steve Macqueen, and a bit taller than Charles Bronson.
Leo2001 said on 22/Apr/17
With Redford:
Click Here
RisingForce said on 13/Apr/17
Yeah, Redford had to be 177 cm minimum and 179 cm max. Newman was definitely around 5'9" when young and with his frame and sometimes cowboy boots, could look 5'10". The short 5'6"-5'7" range stuff is only accurate for an 80 year old Paul Newman. Slightly shorter than 5'9.5" McQueen: Click Here Virtually the same height at 77 years old as 5'7.5" Spielberg in the series of photos from this premiere: Click Here Although as he got to age 79-80, he was finally struggling to hit 5'7", even considering 5'11" or 181 cm Bruce Willis has footwear advantage: Click Here My guess is Newman was 175 cm until some time in his 60s with a chance of 176 in his prime then shrunk to about 169 cm by the time he passed at age 83. Great actor with so many truly classic films. Very average height, technically about an inch or so above average during his 20s and early 30s.
mister_lennon said on 4/Apr/17
I said at peak. Redford was 5'10 peak. With bush, he had lost some heigth.
5'5 for newman is non sense. He was in the 5'9 range. He looked every bit of it.
Five nine said on 3/Apr/17
A 5'9" cousin of mine met Newman and said he was 5'5". I said come on there is no way.
Another friend of mine who is 5'11" met him too and said he was about 5'8".
Richard said on 3/Apr/17
Robert Redford was never 5'10", he was clearly several inches shorter than George W. Bush.
mister_lennon said on 3/Apr/17
5'7 is a joke for newman and for redford. He was a clear 5'9. And redford a clear 5'10. Both looked every beat of it.
Charlie said on 1/Apr/17
I just saw Paul Newman's authentic Drivers license and not one of those phony joke ones nline. It said his height was 5 ft 11 no joke.
Charlie said on 1/Apr/17
5 ft 9 is way to tall for Newman.Paul Newman is 5 ft 7 maybe 5 ft 6.5 but definitely nothing over 5 ft 7. He needs a serious downgrade. And Robert Redford is listed as 5 ft 10 i believe Robert Redford is 5 ft 7 as well. to add to my last comment people tend to realize that people were much shorter back in those days. People born in 1930 and under were average 5 ft 7 and the women were around 5 ft even. I am a lover of old movies like of Mice and Mean 1930 Freaks 1932 and ext.Look at the actors born in the late 18 hundred. The aged actors in 20th Century movies looked about 5 ft 3. My Grandfather was born in 1899. When i was 13 i was 5 ft 6 and i towered over my Grandfather. Actors like Steve McQueen, Paul Newman, Marlon Brando Robert Redford all fell in the same height of 5 ft 7 inches.Just because an actor looks as tall as a 5 ft 9 actor in one movie doesn't mean that is his height. Many movie Producers force many male actors to wear shoe lifts according to the role they are in whether the character is to be a dominate figure or an average Joe. For example Mutiny on the Bounty Trevor Howard was much taller than Brando so the Director had Marlon Brando wear shoe lifts so his height would match Trevor Howard's height hen in fact he was shorter still in the movie.
Charlie said on 1/Apr/17
5 ft 9 is way to tall for Newman.Paul Newman is 5 ft 7 maybe 5 ft 6.5 but definitely nothing over 5 ft 7. He needs a serious downgrade. And Robert Redford is listed as 5 ft 10 i believe Robert Redford is 5 ft 7 as well.
Kevin Kryve said on 25/Mar/17
My dad saw Paul Newman in person when he was making "Winning." He said that he was no more than 5'7" and very narrow and skinny.
mister_lennon said on 24/Mar/17
I think than newman was a solid 5'9 peak. Redford a weak 5'10.
RisingForce said on 23/Mar/17
Hey Rob, maybe add the 1986 quote mentioning the 5'10.5" and the 4 inch growth spurt since it's tougher to find these quotes now. And I agree, Sonny, definitely shorter than Redford and I believe shorter than McQueen who was a measured 5'9.5", but I'm not guessing under 5'9" either.
SonnyboySlim said on 22/Mar/17
I doubt Newman ever was 5'10". I'm not convinced he was under 5'9" (in his prime) but likely a little shorter then Redford who I believe was never 5'11" but likely definitely 5'10" in his prime.
RisingForce said on 21/Mar/17
I think we can narrow him down to more like 5'9" flat with him standing in front of a height chart aged 21 since he had been discharged from the Navy and according to this quote from the Dallas Morning News on 3/24/86, he had his growth spurt to his full adult height while still in the Navy.

"I also was too short for Officers Candidate School, until I grew 4 inches in one year (to his present 5 feet 10 1/2 inches)."

The 5'10.5" figure is interesting though as we know McQueen was a measured 5'9.5" and the 5'10.5" was his height in shoes. Maybe Newman was the same, though I think it's more likely it was in cowboy boots or maybe he was 5'9.5" morning and just added an inch.
Ian C said on 4/Mar/17
Watch the movie Hombre while trying to guess Newman's height and it's pretty obvious that care was taken to make him seem taller than he is, or at least to avoid revealing that he is of only average height. There are no shots of Newman standing on the same level as Richard Boone, who was at least six feet one. He doesn't go near Frederick March either, which seems a little suspicious. He has a scene with Diane Cilento, but both are sitting down. Maybe these tricks were thought necessary because it's a western and Newman thought that his character, who turns out to be the alpha dog, should have been tall.
James said on 20/Feb/17
5'6" wasn't as short for people born in the 1920s when the average height was 5'7" or 5'8".
RisingForce said on 16/Feb/17
He may have been closer to 5'9" flat, imo. He seemed shorter than McQueen, who was probably 5'9.5" and Redford, who was closer to 5'10" plus, he looked short in his older years. 5'9" is still an average height, so quite a solid, average height for Newman's generation.
mande2013 said on 16/Feb/17
I can only laugh when people constantly insist that average height men like Newman, Redford, and Delon were *actually* like 5'6 or so. I think a lot of people don't truly realise how noticeably short 168-169 is for a white male. Even if it's a height you can still "get away with" it does stand out. A 172-173 guy on the other hand can still sort of "blend in".
mande2013 said on 16/Feb/17
He was clearly taller than James Dean.
mande2013 said on 16/Feb/17
Newman is definitely over-listed here, but 5'6-5'7 range is a joke. Come on! He was 173-175 most likely.
Andrew said on 10/Feb/17
Newman was never more than 5'6-7. There's plenty of photo proof available to show it and Larry King stated it on a memorial tribute, so why does it still read 177cm which is nearly 5'10? Same with Redford, they were similar height and build, another reason they worked well together.
Johnson said on 1/Feb/17
@Rob why from 4'9 to 5 feet in the mugshot does it look like 3 inches of difference? I don't understand those 2 marks. The other ones are correct

Click Here
Editor Rob: Johnson, the height chart is correct, but the camera is quite close and Newman in front of it...hence his eye-mouth appears 4 inches and his head over 12 inches.
Bon_ said on 18/Jan/17
strong 177 cm peak
Sandy Cowell said on 19/Dec/16
@ Courtney - hello! An over-7" height loss would surely be the result of osteoporosis. It sounds rather unlikely in the normal run of the things methinks!
What do you think, Rob? I have never read of Paul being anywhere near as short as 5ft3. I thought he was 5ft8 or just over, but even 5" would be a staggering height loss!
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Dec/16
courtney...just go away
courtney said on 15/Dec/16
Paul was 5 ft 10 1/4 in in his youth but you begin to shrink in your late 30's so he was 5 ft 3.1 in when he passed away in 2008 Joanne was 5 ft 4 1/4 in tall and is now 4 ft 10.8 in Robert Redford was 1/4 an in Taller than Paul in their Youth granted there's an 11+ year age difference between them
Arch Stanton said on 10/Dec/16
Mmm, I've seen some of his early films of late and he looked noticeably shorter than he did later on. In the earliest films he is a barefoot in one scene with Walter Pidgeon and although there's a staircase and you don't see them side by side proportionally Newman seemed a weak 5'9 if anything! His later films he really looks a solid 5'10 er at times, had to have worn lifts a lot.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Dec/16
Definitely wore lifts at times, right James? ;-) In Pocket Money he pulled off almost 5 ft 11 with Lee Marvin, who had on big boots himself!
Chase Witherspoon said on 27/Sep/16
I like Paul Newman, watch his movies, buy his sauces, but this does seem ambitious... I couldn't see him more than flat 5'9" whether it was "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" Paul at 33 or "Color of Money" Paul at 61.
hijopotamus said on 5/Aug/16
Rob, Paul shorter than Redford??
In movies like Butch C and the S K or The Sting Newman was clearly taller.
Editor Rob: I didn't get that impression last time I seen the Sting, although they could look reasonably close.
Johnson said on 24/Jul/16
Mugshot Navy picture: My eyes are way over 5'4 (between 5'4-5'5) and I am 5'9.25. Both with normal head size. Paul Newman's eyes are just slightly 5'3 (160.5). In the picture Paul Newman is 174 cm tall maximum. 12 cm typical eye level. Mugshot backgrounds can fool us due to angle in the top of the head. He perhaps grew up a litle more afterwards
Johnson said on 21/Jul/16
@Rob look at the eyes in the navy picture, more 5'3 than 5'4... and the picture guessing of course he is barefoot he does not look over 5'9
Scott said on 17/Jul/16
I don't have much/anything to add here, but...a friend met Michael Douglas at a restaurant and commented on his being a little guy. My friend is a solid 5'8". More, its well known that Tom Cruise is in the 5'7" range. Finally, I was just watching Paul Newman in Harper. In one scene, he was carrying a can of beer. It looked like an oil can that he was holding. I thought, this guy was tiny. Not much to go on, sure, but what many commenters here noted through personal experience seems to ring true. Newman, while a giant as an actor and male role model was probably a little guy. Nothing wrong with that IMO, just saying. Is/was this a character trait for actors being of small stature? Sure sounds like it in many cases. Maybe they went into acting as a means of rising above, get it, their small stature...Cheers!
littlesue said on 9/Jul/16
He would have been in his 60's in the 80's so could have easily shrunk an inch or two,
Liz said on 7/Jul/16
I always had a crush on Paul Newman even though he was my father's age. I'm exactly 5'10" (barefoot) and my husband and I met him at the races in Canada in the 80's. I was shocked at how small he looked. He had to be between 5'7" - 5'9" and was slender. My uncle, who lives in NYC, saw Robert Redford many years ago in Central Park and said he was only about 5'7". If you watch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, he is shorted than Paul Newman. When I was dating, guys always insisted they were 6' and that I had to be 6'. I was happy to get the measuring tape to prove to them that they were the ones exaggerating their height and had a problem with it, not me. I don't care if a guy is shorter than I am. I care more about the person than the height.
mande2013 said on 4/Jul/16
I think Paul Newman needs a downgrade. Here he is with Eva Marie Saint: Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 17/Jun/16
He comes in at just over 5ft10 there
Sam said on 1/Jun/16
My mom would argue he never looked bad right up until the end lol
Orlando said on 29/May/16
On his navy photo one can read something like 5ft 10.3in: Click Here If one subtracts 2 cm of his hair plus 2.5 cm of his military boots one gets something like 1.741 m (between 5ft 8-1/2 in and 5ft 8-3/4in).
See Newman next to 5 ft 11-1/4 in Gore Vidal: Click Here One cannot ascertain about the shoes they were wearing or if they were standing on hard same leveled ground.
Heylo said on 24/May/16
In my honest opinion, based on the navy photo, he looks max 176cm,minimum 175cm, not 177. We don't know if they wear shoes or not on those photos, do you know Rob? I guess 177cm is an okay listing since minus 1 cm marginal isn't a big deal and is hard to prove.
Ian C. said on 22/Apr/16
I just saw a documentary on Netflix about the feud between Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley, and there is a still shot of Newman standing with three other men, all of whom are quite a bit taller than he is. Of course, he was the best-looking man in the shot by a wide margin, which pretty much overruled the height deficit.
James said on 7/Apr/16
He still looked all right until the lung cancer began to take a heavy toll on his appearance.
DonPowell said on 3/Apr/16
There is no way he was 5,9z. I am 5.9 and I was looking down on him. He was at the long each grand pri in the tent . He was thin and short. My guess 5,5 and that was in the late 80s and early 90s., no way on 5,9
Tom said on 26/Mar/16
On an appearance on Leno's Tonight Show, Newman looked several inches shorter than Leno who I believe is 5-11. So no more than 5-9 when he was young and probably 5-7 by the time of that appearance.
Felix Baloy said on 22/Mar/16
@Tom I have to say I disagree he looked quite good for an 80 year old, sure his blue eyes dimmed and his hair began to recede but he still had the same charisma and charm that he did as a young man. Newman was always just Newman which is what I always respected about him and what I feel made him such a beautiful person. He wasn't the greatest man that ever lived but he was always so real but to each his own I suppose.
Tom said on 15/Mar/16
He looked quite bad at the end.
Felix Baloy said on 13/Mar/16
Found his drivers's license which states 5'11'' which might be what he claimed Click Here , I don't think he was quite that tall but i doubt he was far from it. Always liked Newman and he stayed handsome up until his deathbed, hell of a human being.
Paleman said on 25/Feb/16
Looked the listed height. Not below 5'9", that's for sure.
Dan said on 2/Feb/16
I'm pretty sure he was in the 5-9 range. Very slim guy
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 30/Jan/16
Rob, did Newman claim 5ft11?
Editor Rob: I think the bet scenario came about when he was described 5ft 11 in one newspaper, then the other newspaper said about giving money to charity for every inch over 5ft 8 Paul was...I'm not sure Paul himself claimed 5ft 11, but he seemed confident he was well over 5ft 8.
Jim said on 19/Jan/16
I stood next to him at a stock car track in 1979. I am 6' and was wearing sneakers. I was looking down at the top of his head. He was 5'8" or at the very most 5'9".
MikeB said on 19/Jan/16
I also stood next to Mr. Newman at a race in Watkins Glen in 1980. I am 6 ft 1 in and was wearing sneakers. He had racing boots on (I am unsure of the heel) and he was just about 3 inches shorter than me
Jim said on 18/Jan/16
I stood beside him at a stock car track in 1979. I am 6' tall and was in sneakers. I was looking down at the top of his head. I'd say he was 5'8" or at very most 5'9".
Larry said on 27/Oct/15
Paul Newman was 5'9". I really don't see how Kennedy was the most powerful man in history???
Zak said on 22/Sep/15
Apparently he gained 6 inches between 18 and 21. That might be the most epic growth spurt ever.
Arch Stanton said on 22/Aug/15
He did look the s**t in Sweet Bird of Youth in his suit and tortoise shell shades.
Sam said on 19/Aug/15
Did you change his picture?
[Editor Rob: I think the ones from allposters eventually will become broken links, so have to change them.]
MaryAnne said on 11/Jul/15
That's what I call handsome.
Sam said on 10/Jul/15
This biography notes he was 5'3" and 100 pounds when he entered the Navy at age 18, but the time he left the Navy 3 years later, he was six inches taller and had gained 50 pounds, a very late growth spurt.
Click Here
MaryAnne said on 26/Jun/15
My Dream Man... Maybe in another World
Arch Stanton said on 25/Jun/15
I mainly thought Newman looked 5 ft 10 in his films, but seeing Exodus the other day I did think he looked more 5 ft 9 range.
Sam said on 8/Jun/15
Interesting these stills from a screen-test where James Dean and Newman appeared together. He looks 2 inches taller tops than Dean but surprisingly is dropping a little more in posture than Dean, possibly because I think young Newman appears more nervous/fidgety than the relatively composed Dean.
Click Here
Bon_ said on 13/Apr/15
The listing is just fine.
Sam said on 10/Apr/15
I would certainly believe 5'9" flat peak for Newman, I saw him on stage and thought he looked 5'8" at age 79. Although he could look a little taller in some films.
Paul said on 9/Apr/15
I've stood next to Paul Newman several times during the 1987 SCCA race season at various race tracks, both of us wearing flat driving shoes. I'm just over 5'10" and my Dad is 5'7". Paul Newman was between us in height, at least an inch shorter than me, 5'9" tops, but I'd lean toward 5'8.5" and he went about 135 lbs. Tom Cruise raced that season (1987) too and he was no more than 5'7", I'd say probably 5' 6.5", and he went about 165 lbs. I was 5'10.5" and about 150lbs back then. Newman was skinnier and shorter than me and Cruise was stockier and *way* shorter than me.
Alex said on 13/Feb/15
Dad met him in Florida both same height my dad is 5'9
Jack Harry said on 11/Feb/15
Just saw what looked like military service photo of Newman. The measurment line
shows him just over 5'
10". Don't know if they allowed shoes in those pictures.
angel said on 23/Jan/15
he was 5 ft 10.25 in when he was younger it's his widow Joanne Woodward that fell into the 5 ft 3 in to 5 ft 6 in height group at 5 ft 4 in
Mike said on 13/Jan/15
5ft 9.5-10 range at peak.
Sam said on 5/Jan/15
Hombre does deserve a mention & would round out his credits to 10.
Arch Stanton said on 29/Dec/14
5'3-5'6 is ridiculous!! Honestly looked around 5 ft 10 in most of his films in the 50s and 60s anyway!
Arch Stanton said on 29/Dec/14
Rob can you squeeze in Hud, The Verdict, Hombre, The Color of Money and Road to Perdition?
Sam said on 10/Dec/14
At times in photos, he can give a 5'9" impression, maybe even a weak or shade under 5'9". On screen, though, he could look nearly 5'10" at times. Best comparisons might be with McQueen, who looked really similar in Towering Inferno, and Redford, who seemed to be a bit taller maybe by 0.5"-1".
wishbone said on 3/Dec/14
CLASS and QUALITY describes Paul Newman! He may not have liked his "baby teeth" movie,The Silver Chalice (just watched it last Tuesday),but Vince Saville said it would be the start for Newman of a winning career.It was! I have some Newman movies in the video "stew," but The Silver Chalice is me favorite Paul Newman movie,because I love Bible epics. But what I liked best about Newman: he had just one wife,5'3" Joanne Woodward,for 59 years! (Very few performers can claim longer marriages to one person like Newman did! CLASS and QUALITY!
Perplexed said on 24/Sep/14
I saw him in Syracuse, NY where he filed part of a movie, 'Slapshot'. He was short. I am about 5'7'' and he was maybe 5'8''.
Sam said on 1/Aug/14
I've commented a few times I had the honor of seeing in his last role on-stage in Our Town. He still looked like he edged out 5'8" Jeffrey DeMunn. If Newman was 5'3"-5'6" range, I would eat my hat.
Sam said on 31/Jul/14
There's a surprising number of comments about Newman appear 5'3"-5'6" by people who claim to have seen him at racetracks. Are these really all from different commentors, Rob? The man was 5'9.5" peak and 5'8.25" towards the end IMO.
[Editor Rob: you had Frank2 and his second alter ego who met him and thought he was near 5ft 10, and I don't think that man was making it up. Whether it was a slight overestimate or not I don't know, but certainly you wouldn't be getting a 4 inch overestimate :)]
Jay said on 30/Jul/14
I met Mr.Newman in the pit a race in Atlanta and he was not over 5'6! I'm 5'10 and he was at my chest level. He also had on cowboy boots! Still had those beautiful eyes and smile. He knee my boyfriend so he and Joann were very nice.
Chuckie Cheese 2 said on 14/Jul/14
It appears his 1943 Navy photo has surfaced. He looks 5 ft 10+, with shoes I am assuming. Click Here
waitress said on 11/Jul/14
I was a waitress at the Sheraton in Ithaca NY in the late 70's early 80's. Paul Newman stayed there when he raced at Watkins Glen. I waited on him. He was quite short, like maybe 5'6". I am only 5'1" so it didn't bother me a bit. He was very handsome, his eyes were really blue, very polite as well. It made my day to wait on him at a banquet that was held there for the Watkins Glen racers. There were a lot of celebs there, among them Gene Hackman, Dorothy Hammil, and Jon Michael Vincent. I think they use lots of tricks in the movies to make short actors look taller.
existential.man said on 29/May/14
at the Color of Money premiere he looks a bit shorter than Tom Cruise...
mike58 said on 27/May/14
Met him in 1982 at Watkins Glen after a race. I am 6'1", he had on hard soled shoes and appeared 5'10" to me.
Arch Stanton said on 19/May/14
It's hard to see him under 5 ft 10 peak to be honest. As Sam says he looked taller on screen than 5'9" actors.
Arch Stanton said on 19/May/14
I think he can actually pass for 5'10" range peak. Julie Andrews in 2-2.5 inch heels still looked 2 inches shorter in Torn Curtain.
Emmett said on 13/May/14
Are people in the early comments just trolling, or did they actually see a 5'5 Paul Newman? He never looks anything less than 5'9 in pictures where footwear is visible.
Sam said on 8/Apr/14
In Cool Hand Luke, he's wearing pretty big work boots and could pass for almost 5'11" I thought, seeming to have several inches over guys like Dennis Hopper, Harry Dean Stanton, etc., only towered himself by George Kennedy. In that movie, he gave a taller impression IMO than, say, Nicholson or De Niro ever gave.
bloke said on 21/Feb/14
Watched Cool Hand Luke last night. Newman looked 5'9"-5'10" to me.
Arch Stanton said on 11/Jan/14
5 ft 8 is rubbish Ryan. Generally he looked about 5'10 to me in the many films I've seen him in.
Ryan Hung said on 24/Dec/13
I'd say Newman was 5' 8.25" or so.
J said on 15/Dec/13
If you watch The Color Of Money"You can clearly see that he's not taller than Tom Cruise 172-4 to me
Sam said on 13/Dec/13
There's a bunch of pictures of Newman and McQueen and they generally look similar in height. There's no one picture where McQueen and Newman are standing at the same distance and same posture, so each one looks taller in some.
Click Here
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 3/Dec/13
Arch, the fact that he died has nothing to do with it. He was the son of arguably the most powerful man in history and was possibly going to follow in his father's footsteps.
Arch Stanton said on 20/Nov/13
See Click Here That's how is looked in the film.
Arch Stanton said on 20/Nov/13
Rob how can he be shorter than Steve Mcqueen? He had an inch on Mcqueen in the Towering Inferno I thought.
Arch Stanton said on 11/Nov/13
IMO looks around 5'10 in most things I've seen him in, including The Hustler.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Nov/13
IMO in his prime 177-9 would be more likely than 174-6. 177cm is probably spot on barefoot, but it's difficult to see some actors at 5 ft 10 on here like Bob Hope and to think Paul was shorter.
Arch Stanton said on 8/Nov/13
@Rampage I'd be happy with a page for any celebrity with the exception of the reality and untalented kiddy boppers but it's up the Rob whether he starts a page isn't it/ JFK died nearly 15 years ago, he's unlike to get much traffic.

5 ft 6 is ridiculous LOL. Watching Long Hot Summer now and he really looks 5 ft 10 to me.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 29/Sep/13
Arch do you think JFK Jr. should get a page?
Arch Stanton said on 24/Sep/13
Here's JFK jr with Bill Clinton Click Here . Clinton looks 6'2.5" in comparison.
Arch Stanton said on 24/Sep/13
Looks a bit taller than Redford in The Sting. Redford looks quite short in that film for some reason.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Sep/13
Was 178cm possible, Rob?
Arch Stanton said on 31/Aug/13
He looks a similar height to Robert Redford in Butch Cassidy.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Jul/13
Rob, he's listed 6ft1 in most places. But I got the impression he could've been nearer 6ft2?
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 14/Jul/13
Rob, how tall would you say JFK jr. looks next to Newman in this pic?
Click Here
[Editor Rob: I think 6ft 1 range]
Sam said on 19/Jun/13
Again, to me, Newman was never lower than 5'8" in old age based on seeing him on-stage next to Jeffrey De Munn and other actors.
i said on 30/May/13
Yeah, 177 seems right. Anywhere between 176-178.
adrian said on 10/May/13
SIRCAM Newman is kneeling in that pic and Eastwood is riding an invisible horse.
Meyer said on 10/May/13
"Something wrong here - the serial number at the foot of the photo is the same as in the early photo where he is 5'9". Photoshopped?"
Of course the serial number is the same. It was his serial number.
denben said on 8/May/13
"Looks like he either grew while in the Navy or something is a bit different in how this picture was taken. Almost 6 feet here. Click Here"
Something wrong here - the serial number at the foot of the photo is the same as in the early photo where he is 5'9". Photoshopped?
Optm said on 28/Apr/13
My mother met Paul Newman in the 1970s when he went to shop at the department store where she worked in Washongton, DC. She said he was very kind and charming, strikingly handsome, and very short -- maybe about 5'5".
little sue said on 28/Apr/13
Lol, now was he as short as 5ft 4!! Watching him tonight in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and next to Liz Taylor, who would have been about 5ft 4 in her highest heels she still comes up to his lip.
Dr. Gary said on 26/Apr/13
Paul Newman was about 5 foot 4 inches. He also was a great actor, race car driver, Clevelander, and human being. Am suprised people are still fooled.
Lol said on 21/Apr/13
From looking at that height chart pic he's definitely taller then 5'8 in the navy
Meyer said on 3/Apr/13
Looks like he either grew while in the Navy or something is a bit different in how this picture was taken. Almost 6 feet here. Click Here
Meyer said on 3/Apr/13
That is not a police picture that JimmyR posted. It is a World War II Navy photo. There is another one floating around the Internet as well.
Theodore said on 1/Apr/13
Unless he was barefoot in the police station in JimmyR's photo below he wasn't 5' 9".
JimmyR said on 8/Feb/13
Click Here
whizzy said on 1/Feb/13
My dad once ran into Paul Newman at the airport; they were looking at books together on one of those book things that went around in circles; my dad turned one way and felt another guy turn the other. At some point, he looked around and saw Paul Newman and they both agreed to turn it the same way :) My dad, who is 6' said Paul was a "little guy" and when I asked how little he said "oh about 5'8. Not a professional estimation, but I trust my dad :)
leonari said on 29/Jan/13
What are you guys on?? Newman was an average guy. If he was 5'5" how tall was James Dean who was clearly 2-3 inches shorter than Newman. Please tell me that James Dean was 5'2". That would make my day and obviously confirm you guys belong in an asylum. Incredible...
Sam said on 28/Jan/13
Wow, a lot of people have live sightings of him as 5'3"-5'5"! Take it from a guy who saw him in person, I think he was not as low as 5'8" in his 70s.
Patchy said on 26/Jan/13
The picture of Newman and Eastwood is cropped. Newman is standing on something - he was 5'5" - saw him many times at the studio. Look at his arms in any movie - you'll see how short they are. When he stands next to someone much taller, he'll be standing on something. It's standard. Studios built the door frames smaller and furniture smaller to make him appear taller.
Patchy said on 26/Jan/13
The picture of Newman and Eastwood is cropped. Newman is standing on something - he was 5'5" - saw him many times at the studio. Look at his arms in any movie. When he stands next to someone much taller, he'll be standing on something. It's standard. Same thing for Tom Cruise. Watch the camera pan around him while everyone else is moving. He's on a box.
me said on 18/Jan/13
Here you have some truth. 21 YO Newman hitting somewhere between 5'9" and 5'10" (probably wearing shoes IMO, if not boots, since as the article says: "Newman always regarded himself as undersized")Not that I care, I don't think this means he was short anyway

Click Here
Okiman said on 26/Dec/12
Larry King when giving a tribute to Newan after his death clearly stated he was only 5'6.Why would be lie about a dead man on his tribute show? James Dean was around 5'5 and looked it next to Newman.Brando was in the 5'7-5'8 range.Have you never heard of the 3 inch rule in Hollywood?
laVieenrose said on 21/Dec/12
Incredible how it has not possible for me, to know how really Newman was tall!!
So i 've found a similar picture, like to sircam, in which Newman is near to Clint Eastwood.
I've noticed that in the picture there are some blu bricks...usually bricks are long a "perfect" number of cemtimetres...10, 20.... In this case probably (at 99%) 10 centimetres....so, count them, and is easy to see that, Newman overcome 1,75, only with his hair and with his shoes...i wait for your comments
Sam said on 28/Nov/12
I believe at his peak, he could have easily hit 5'10.5" in shoes and often looked that figure on screen. He could pass for even 5'11" in his Cool Hand Luke boots.
bill27 said on 3/Nov/12
He was racing in Palm Beach back in the 80s. Saw him in the pit and put him at about 5-07"
RisingForce said on 12/Oct/12
Yeah, I've read about the bet on Newman's height. I have very little doubt he was at least 5'9", if not 5'10", but there was a book that mentioned Paul privately consulted an orthopedist to find out how to make himself as tall as possible for the measurement. Apparently, measuring early in the morning was recommended as well as hanging from "gravity boots" the night before the measurement and right before the measurement.
RisingForce said on 11/Oct/12
Rob, do you think this height was a figure Newman told the interviewer?

"I also was too short for Officers Candidate School, until I grew 4 inches in one year (to his present 5 feet 10 1/2 inches). - 3/24/86 Dallas Morning
[Editor Rob: 5ft 10 or 10.5 or 11 is pretty much what he might have said, 145 pound range aswell. He had an argument with the New York post remember about them claiming he was 5ft 8 and he would bet he wasn't.

Well worth reading for anybody who hasn't, as I think he was very confident he had measured more than 5ft 8: Click Here.
]
Ozzy said on 19/Aug/12
Lol ha ha, oh boy many celebrities are thought or believed to be taller than their actual physical heights! Fact is, as real human beings, beautiful or not, male or female, we may not even think of their heights as real but imagined. They appear one way, yet are another in person . What a camera and fame does to a person!
Musicman said on 16/Aug/12
Sorry Spats who has the Navy link he's 5'9" in that pic. You people don't realize when you measure a height you don't count the inch or inch and a half hair sticking up lol! You mash the hair down at the crown, the highest part of your head and make the measurement. He was 5'9' then, period. I I would have counted the height of all of my big, spiked up hair in 80's hair metal band photos I would have been 6ft 2in counting 4 inches of hair and I'm 5'10" barefoot! It's not so complicated people, use your common sense, you don't count shoes or hair.
Lebensdorf said on 8/Jun/12
SIRCAM, I doubt Paul Newman was 6'2". Eastwood is clearly bending his legs considerably in that picture, so both men can get in the same shot together, which is probably why they appear to be laughing a bit. Newman was around 5'8" or 5'9". His build makes him seem taller. It's the same with Paul Hogan, who looks like he could be tall but isn't.
SIRCAM said on 12/Feb/12
This pic is interesting: Paul Newman 5,9...With ex 6,4 Clint Eastwood. Click Here
leonari said on 8/Feb/12
if and LL: Those figures are a joke. Newman was very close to 5'10 and therefore average or even over average for his generation.
Greg said on 7/Feb/12
My Summer job in college one Year was working as an extra on the movie "Winning" with Paul Newman and Robert Wagner. I met Paul Newman there,and had conversations with him probably a dozen times or more. He was right at my height--5'10". Really nice "down to earth" guy!
Sam said on 31/Jan/12
I saw Paul Newman onstage in Our Town and, granted he was on stage, but even at his advanced age he still looked no less than 5'7"-5'8" range compared to others including Jeffrey De Munn
race fan said on 29/Jan/12
I'm 6'1" Paul Newman walked out of his pit at a race in Edmonton in about 1982. He walked directly into my chest face first his head didn't even reach my chin that would make him at most 5'5". But he made up for it by yelling every expletive know to man at me for being in his way.
shrapnel said on 21/Jan/12
My mom met him back in 1965. She had my sister in her baby carriage and he patted my sister on her head and said "what a cute kid!" My mom is 5'9" and said she was the same height or slightly taller than Mr. Newman. Awesome actor and person.
Brad said on 17/Jan/12
As listed easily. The comments below are a comedy show about Newman & Redford's heights. Imagine saying Paul was 5' 6" in 1967. What a joke. He looked near 5' 10" in Harper and over 6' in cowboy boots in Butch Cassidy. I saw him a few times in Connecticut in the 70's, he was as listed with ease even in racing footwear upstate at Lime Rock. Even the G had this one agreed.
if said on 15/Jan/12
Saw Newman in an elevator in 1992 - just him & me. He was 5'6" or 5'6 1/2". I'm 5'10", and my Dad is 5'8 1/2". He was way shorter than my Dad. I'm a huge fan of his acting, but he was nowhere close to 5'9".
LL said on 26/Dec/11
My mom stood next to Paul Newman once in 1967. She was 5'7", wearing flats, and she said she was eye-to-eye with him. She says he was 5'6" or 5'7" tops.
little sue said on 12/Dec/11
That was later on in his career, he could have lost a bit of height after hitting 50
carpenter said on 9/Dec/11
In "Message in a bottle" Paul walks next to Robbin Wright Penn (on the beach)and is only a little taller than her. He is wearing shoes and she isn't! There is no way he is 5'9.5" 5'7" tops.
Luke said on 17/Sep/11
5'9 or 5'10, doesn't matter.. The dude acted 10" tall..
sam said on 3/Sep/11
I think he was 5'9
Kid Halcyon said on 2/Sep/11
I first met Paul in 1975 and saw him regularly at the races until his final drive in the fall of '07. His wife Joanne and he had dinner with our family at least a dozen times over the years; he was a wonderfully decent person and a darned good driver. As for his height, at age 50 when I first met him, he was definitely a good inch shorter than me ( a 5'9.5" fifteen year-old). The comments and speculation are most interesting regarding the various celebrity heights.
Andrew said on 21/Aug/11
Wow, this listing is a shocker for me (not that I don't believe it). I never really thought about Newman's height, but in my subconscious he was a tall dude, like 6"1'.
Jeanne said on 22/Jul/11
I'm just watching Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and started thinking about their heights, because they look so short. And also because years ago, I saw Robert Redford walk into a NYC restaurant with a couple. It was late and my friend and I were the only other people in the restaurant, so there were no distractions. I would guess that he was about 5'7" or 5'8". No taller than that. I had always assumed he was 5'10 or 6'0' up to that point, and was quite shocked to discover that he wasn't.

But here's something else I've discovered since then, and I apologize in advance to all men who visit this page: Men tend to overestimate their own height. Which undoubtedly means they also overestimate how tall other people are. Most men I know who are under 6'0", or maybe even 5'10", will tell you they are at least 2" taller than they appear to be. Either they or slouching a whole bunch, or they have vivid imaginations. Since I have longed to be taller than I am and know that I am exactly 5'5 3/4" and not one bit shorter or taller, and I have very good posture, I am also a very good judge of height. And I would wager that Newman was a little shorter than Redford, not taller. But I could be wrong about that. Camera angles are funny things.
Phil said on 22/Jul/11
i thought he was taller than redford.
Bella said on 19/Jul/11
Folks....there is something called 'lifts' in shoes...and when standing next to someone in a photo or film....standing on a small platform or box. Angles mean everything with height. I have to say....I was sadly disappointed to realize, that celebrities are MUCH SHORTER than you might believe. For instance....some years ago, I came across Corey Feldman and Jennifer Tilly at Universal Studios in California. I was shocked at how short Feldman was...and frail looking beneath an oversized suit jacket. Im 5'4 and I will say he was either eye to eye or about an inch or so off. Jennifer....was small as well. Since that day....I see celebrities in a whole new light. Directors are good at their craft for a reason. Im willing to bet, Paul Newman was most likely around 5'6 or 5'7. In his time....they didnt want TALL actors. They were limited with sets. There were exceptions of course....but for the most part, they hired shorter people.
Bon_ said on 5/Jul/11
yeah, newman was 5'6 and redford solid 6' but he 'doesn't care'
tell-em said on 1/Jul/11
bon, i'm surprised you're still with that 5'10.5" newman and 5'7" redford crap. After all the evidence has been dumped on this page showing those heights you state are WAY OFF. but continue to spew you're nonsense. you ain't convincing anybody. And you're wrong.
TruebloodFan said on 30/Jun/11
like Ben Quick could ever be anything under 5ft10. get real Will.
Bon_ said on 28/May/11
Will, you stupid Redford PR agent. There are tons of testimonies from people that Redford was never over 5'7, and yet you use this ridiculous reverse psichology that Newman was 5'8 - 5'9. Newman 5'10.5 at peak, Redford 5'7 on his bestest day. Even if he was 5'5 as aslan says it wouldn't surprise the crap out of me.
aslan said on 24/May/11
About 10 years ago we had a family reunion at Sundance in Utah. My wife walked by Mr Redford in a narrow hall and they exchanged greetings. She told me she was surprised that she looked down on him a bit height wise and she
was only wearing low shoes-she is 5'6.5" tall. Maybe he had shrunk some (he was already in his mid 60's) but at the time she estimated 5'5" based on her close encounter.
Will said on 19/May/11
Paul Newman was likely 5'8"-5'9" tall. He was never 5'10" IMO.
Mirta said on 6/May/11
If Demi Moor is 5'5, then Robert Redford is EASILY four inches taller than she is in the picture you linked, so that would make him at least 5'9.
Bon_ said on 25/Apr/11
I absolutely agree Joel
Joel said on 23/Apr/11
No Way Robert Redford is 5'9. Robert Redford is about 5'6 or 5'7.
Take a look at this pic of him with Demi Moore. She is 5'5 and wearing flat shoes. His shoes have a heel (which you can see a few seconds earlier in this scene from Indecent Proposal).
Click Here
Bon_ said on 15/Apr/11
lmao Redford would be towered by Newman. Hollywood brainwash industry did its job this time.
Adam said on 11/Apr/11
I think paul newman was an absolute legend, however how come he is always listed taller then robert redford who is much taller while paul was in his older age (of course we shrink), but even in the sundance kid redford was taller whats your view on this rob?

[Editor Rob: I don't think newman was as tall as redford and don't list him as such. He did look to lose 3cm by his final year]
tell-em said on 7/Apr/11
rob pinned this man's height down correctly!
Bon_ said on 31/Mar/11
you saw wrong then.
Finman said on 15/Mar/11
I saw Newman at a shopping center in Indiana many years ago when he was campaigning for George McGovern. At that time he was no taller than 5ft.6in and I don't believe that he grew any after that. He was a great actor but he was short.
Spats MacGee said on 13/Mar/11
Proof that Paul was 5 foot ten, would the navy lie to you? Click Here
Bon_ said on 19/Feb/11
you jerks guessing 5'7 for Newman should have challenged his bet and now you would be millionaires.
MikeyB58 said on 19/Feb/11
I met Mr. Newman around 1980, he was driving in a race in Watkins Glen, NY. I am 6'1", he was 3" shorter than me....so somewhere near 5'10" at that time is correct.
Rajneesh said on 12/Feb/11
5'8" TOPS, probably closer to 5'7"...Walked past him on the street once and I'm 5' 10".
Bon_ said on 9/Feb/11
@ George H.

Well, then obviously you don't have the ability to gauge heights. I feel pity for you.
George H. said on 9/Feb/11
@Bon_ are you serious? Thinking that a person is below a certain height in your opinion constitutes "not standing that person and their success"? Man, that's........ odd, to put it mildly. Newman was one of the coolest dudes in showbiz and otherwise. A great humanitarian to boot. He also wasn't, from what I've seen in movies and photos, a 5'10" guy, period. Liking or disliking a person has absolutely nothing to do with their physique. Like I said below, I'm not a fan of Brosnan, but he isn't a "very short" dude. If anything, it seems you are the one who can't separate your dislike for a person from facts regarding their appearance. And Redford wasn't 5'10" either, but 5'6" for him is laughable.
Bon_ said on 8/Feb/11
@ George H.

You have a right to express your opinion, but of course I wholesomely disagree with you. I just hope your opinion is sincere, that you are not one of those frustrated men who can't stand Paul Newman and his success. And he was over 5'10 certainly.
George H. said on 8/Feb/11
Not a fan of Brosnan, but he's definitely not "very short" (which in my opinion for a guy would be 5'6" or less). That's a ridiculous statement. I also don't believe Newman was ever 5'10". 5'9" maybe, but to me he always looked slightly below that, even.
Bon_ said on 7/Feb/11
You don't have to be very small boned to be lanky, Newman was quite small boned but not at all lanky, he was quite naturally muscular. When you are small bulked, your proportions also may appear smaller, so that's it. But I think it's better to be small bulked because it's more +economic'.
Example of a lanky guy who may claim ridiculous heights is Pierce Brosnan, he is very short in real life but for promotion and similar stuff they have him at 6'1 - 6'2, and he can pass for it because he is so lanky.
And I agree, 5'10 - 5'11 range for Newman but Redford was more like 5'6 - 5'7.
Anonymous said on 7/Feb/11
Newman did look like a strong 5'10 in his younger days. He and Robert Redford were pretty much the same height, give or take half an inch.

And Bon, I thought it's the other way around? People who are lanky and have smaller bones often look taller than what they really are. I'm a guy just under 5'10, I have broad shoulders and big bones - and I've been told by people that I do look a bit shorter than what I really am. My brother is an inch shorter than me and people always think he is taller because he has a smaller, lankier frame than I do.
Bon_ said on 1/Feb/11
Well it's possible he never went under 5'9, ten years ago he was around 75.
Maybe close to 5'10 even then, peak around 5'10.5, 5'10.75 max in my opinion since he was listed at 5'11 when younger.
Bill said on 29/Jan/11
I met Paul Newman about ten years ago at Southern Connecticut State University. I shook hands with him and felt at least 2 inches shorter. I am 5'8". He was at least 5'10"
Bon said on 22/Jan/11
I just watched 'Sweet Bird of Youth'...looks to be 5'10.25 or even 5'10.5
Bon said on 21/Jan/11
Newman had a small frame(although very well muscled) which could have made him appear shorter. My dad also has a small frame a until you get close up to him you could think he's like 5'8, but he's always been a strong 5'11.25 :)
So I don't think he was ever as low as 5'7 as someone down stated. There is a pic on the net actually where an 'old shrunken Newman' is taller than 5'9 Jude Law.
Bon said on 21/Jan/11
just go on, I'm very sure the truth is on my side.
tell-em said on 21/Jan/11
hahaha this bon guy can't be serious....its easy to state somebody's height out of nowhere without any evidence. keep making a fool out of yourself,kid, i enjoy reading your posts.
Bon said on 21/Jan/11
OK now If you want to discuss Redford go to his page, this is Newman's site and certainly I won't take any 'a bit taller than Newman' bull**** here.
Bon said on 21/Jan/11
tell-em I have some knowledge in physical anthropology that you can only dream of, there is no theory Robert Redford could have been over 5'8 ever at any part of the day of his life, and Newman was possibly 5'10.5 as he stated.

jtm Stallone WAS 5'10 or very close why do you guys pick up the wrong persons for height exaggeration accusations? Redford, Cruise etc. always were and are SHORT, Stallone and Newman were NOT.
Bon said on 21/Jan/11
No, it's not particularly ridiculous Sam. In fact, it is even generous.
Newman was over 5'10 at peak and likely towered over Redford, but he had compassion for his short friend so kept the height secret.
Sam said on 19/Jan/11
The idea that Redford as 5'7" is particularly ridiculous. If anything, he appeared to be over 5'10" at his peak. He was a bit taller than Newman, maybe by 0.75"
tell-em said on 18/Jan/11
the difference is that bon has no proof at all of redford at 5'7". so that makes the matter EVEN MORE ridiculous.
jtm said on 18/Jan/11
come on bon you don't want to end up as the same guy that was fighting for a ridiculous 5'10.75 for stallone.redford without shoes was measured at 5'9.75.
tell-em said on 17/Jan/11
then in that case, you need to stop saying robert redford is 5'7", and any other heights of actors including a 5'10 and a half paul newman since according to you, none of those actors ever measured in front of you barefoot.
Bon said on 17/Jan/11
only proof you could give me is to measure real robert redford barefoot in front of me, I don't bother to explore what tricks do they use on films.
tell-em said on 16/Jan/11
haha. look son, i just posted thorough evidence of him looking over 5'7".thats proof right there. you've posted nothing. eyewitness? hahaha. only a stooge would fall for a "eyewitness" account w/out ANY PROOF of evidence such as a pic. again, post PROOF of redford looking 5'7". till then, he ain't 5'7".
Bon said on 16/Jan/11
just look at the comments of eyewitnesses on Redford's page, besides, I'm quite versed in physical anthropology and its correlation with height so i can estimate some things.
Bon said on 15/Jan/11
and you have no proof he's over 5'7 barefoot. nice try, but if real robert redford appeared barefoot for measurement, i think I'd win the bet.
tell-em said on 14/Jan/11
nope. look at the shots of him playing ping pong w/ paul newman. newman's in shoes and redford is barefoot. he isn't 5'7" and you have no proof whatsoever.
Bon said on 14/Jan/11
the easiest one - lifts, camera angles etc.
after all, Redford is is an all-American hero, it's not 'appropriate' for him to be short.
tell-em said on 10/Jan/11
Bon says on 8/Jan/11
do you have a proof he was 5'10 at peak?
no, i personally think, based on various evidence, he was 5'7 absolute max at his peak.

sure i do...look at this: Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here .... explain how redford looks as tall or taller than paul newman in these pics if you say he is only 5'7"? i can't wait to see what kind of evidence you bring of redford looking 5'7"...i'm dying to see.
Bon said on 9/Jan/11
@ TruebloodFan

yeah, to me too. Strong 5'10 for Newman.
He was obviously not a flat 5'9 because with that bet of his that would mean he is crazy, and Paul Newman was never such a person, you could tell.
georgeclooneysmum said on 8/Jan/11
RisingForce the camera angle in your Paul Newman height chart photos seems to be in line with Paul's eyes. For the record if i look straigh ahead my eyeline is just under 5'6 1/2. I am just under 5'11. So the more grown up photo of Paul does indicate he is 5'9 1/2 since his eyeline is 5'5.
Bon said on 8/Jan/11
do you have a proof he was 5'10 at peak?
no, i personally think, based on various evidence, he was 5'7 absolute max at his peak.
TruebloodFan said on 8/Jan/11
Always looked a strong 5ft10 to me.
tell-em said on 7/Jan/11
do u have proof that redford was 5'7" peak?
Bon said on 7/Jan/11
maybe it should be a little higher. redford was below 5'7 at his peak.
tell-em said on 6/Jan/11
rob's height listing is fine. 5'9.5. a tad bit shorter than robert redford.
Bon said on 5/Jan/11
Newman was a person who was obviously very comfortable about his height, and the huge amount of money he offered for the bet is the ultimate proof that he was absolutely over 5'9. He said 'If the verdict is 5'8' therefore if he measured even slightly under 5'9 he was at risk of turning absolutely ridiculuos. That testifies about his certainty that he was well over 5'9(and remember, that was in 1986, when he was 60), and since the only ocassion where he has given his height states 5'10.5, I sincerely think you should upgrade him to 5'10 at least Rob, but 5'10.25 would probably be the most reasonable. I really think Newman's current peak height is a wee bit underestimated, which gives fertile soil to frustrated jerks to make up stories how he was 'short, under me at 5'8 at a good day' etc. Paul Newman was obviously a solid 5'10.
Bon said on 16/Dec/10
@Chris Robinson

do you remember in which year it was?
Bon said on 8/Dec/10
John, why are so jealous Paul Newman is so much better looking than you?
John said on 7/Dec/10
I actually had the chance to stand toe to toe with Paul Newman( quite funny story ) actually was steping on his feet ..But the fact is i'm 5' 8" and Mr Newman was looking up at me my best estimate is he was no taller than 5' 5" at best.
Bon said on 7/Dec/10
@ anonymous, possibly interesting piece of evidence. how do we explain that, now?
that would put redford at no more than struggling 5'8 at peak.
Bon said on 29/Nov/10
176 at the very least, he always looked a bit taller than the plain average.
But my guess is 178 peak.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 20/Nov/10
Looked 175-176cm.
anonymous said on 19/Nov/10
Check the scene referred to.
Mr. R said on 17/Nov/10
Anonymous, many tricks can be done to make one actor taller than the other. You could raise the camera lens, shoot from a different angle, or the ground might not be level. Also, most probably, you can put lifts and higher heels on the boots of the guy who wants to b taller.
Sam said on 16/Nov/10
In the closing scene of The Sting they are walking together down the street and Redford does seem an 1 or 1.5 inches taller.
Anonymous said on 15/Nov/10
This thing about Redford being taller than Newman in Butch Cassidy is bunk. In the scene right after they escape the posse by jumping off the cliff, they are walking up to Katherine Ross's house side by side. She runs up to embrace both men, then backs off. They are both facing the camera, full body shots on the same level ground. Newman is at least two inches taller.
Bon said on 1/Nov/10
@stevie

In his 80-s he has surely shrunk.
stevie said on 1/Nov/10
I saw him coming out of a drugstore here in NY (where I've seen tons of celebrities) He looked about 5'7".
Bon said on 29/Oct/10
I really don't think he was anything under 177 at his peak.
5'9 no way.
Frank2 said on 3/Jul/09
5'10" Newman with 5'6" conductor Zubin Mehta:

Click Here
mcfan said on 21/Jun/09
My quote on Paul's age was wrong when I met him. He was in fact 60 years old (1985). He only looked 5'8.5, but he did look in the 5'10 range in his earlier films. All I can say is without any doubt is that Paul was only 5'8.5 in 1985. When I see Slapshot (only 8 years earlier) he looks closer to 5'10. One thing I also noted is that his nose looks bigger in person than it did on film and it was hooked.
RisingForce said on 1/Jun/09
Yeah it does get annoying leonari, especially when all logical posters have already figured out that Newman was in the 5-9, 5-10 range during his prime(and probably through the 1980's). Anyone who says 5-8 or under has no perception of height. Too bad the newspaper didn't take Newman's bet that he'd measure over 5-8. That would have taken care of garbage posts like Big Juan's.

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, shoe or bra 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.