How tall is Tom Cruise - Page 7

Add a Comment4631 comments

Average Guess (1222 Votes)
5ft 7.2in (170.7cm)
jjj said on 16/Oct/17
@Parker: Look at the size of those boots though! He's around 5'9-10 there compared to 6' Nicholas Cage. He's probably about 5'7 barefoot.
Slim 6' said on 16/Oct/17
Needs the full 5'8" upgrade.
Tom said on 16/Oct/17
@Jeremy Pivin Ben Stiller ain't 5'8" though.
Parker said on 14/Oct/17
Click Here

Standing ~ 2inches shorter than Jake Gyllenhaal with a little extra footwear. 5'7.5-5'8. Rob's listing is spot on.
Jeremy Pivin said on 13/Oct/17
it's pretty straightforward, he's half an inch taller than 5'8" Ben Stiller so Tom easily hits 5'8.5" barefoot in Tom Sooo Tahl & Manly Nail Seyo.
In Korea, height is an obsession, specially in the younger generation. Short guys are openly ostracized and bodyshamed. Yet they absolutely Loooooove TC. If he really were as short as some here claim, they'd be making fun of him 24/7, instead of naming beauty parlor after him.
Ditto in China, his nickname there is DA-SHAN MAA --> Big Mountain Horse. 'nuff said
Rising - 174 cm said on 13/Oct/17
@Rob: Yeah, that's the type of boot I had in mind. And I guessed his boots at 2.3" here with Bruckheimer: Click Here They look pretty similar, though I don't know if they're the same boot as the other occasion with Bruckheimer: Click Here

I also had these in mind with Cameron Diaz: Click Here If she's 5'11" in those heels then Cruise looks like he'd reach around 177 cm in his boots. In general, he probably wore his biggest footwear promoting that film with Diaz probably because she consistently wore her high heels: Click Here Click Here

At Bruckheimer's ceremony, he looked at least 3 cm taller to me, but not more than 1.5" taller. If he is 171 cm then Cruise passes for a 174 c m man, maybe a weak 5'9". I do have to wonder how he'd look next to Bruckheimer without lifts, especially after seeing this photo on the set of Days of Thunder: Click Here My guess is they'd be very, very close. Much like Cruise with Spielberg.

The one thing that makes Tom's lifts very obvious in these photos is the jeans he wears with them. A longer boot cut jean a bit looser would conceal them much better. Lately, he seems to prefer more of a 2" elevator shoe.
Pierre said on 13/Oct/17
The SUN (extract)
Top Gun turns 30: What you never knew about the Tom Cruise classic
Tom Cruise is three inches shorter than the actress who played his love
interest in the film, Kelly McGillis.

“Tom and (director) Tony (Scott) and I really weren’t bothered by the height
difference, but apparently Paramount was, so I acted the whole time in my
stocking feet,” Kelly told NewsOK.

Not only did Kelly not wear any shoes during their scenes, but Tom wore
special cowboy boots that gave him a little height boost.
Slim 6' said on 13/Oct/17
HonestSlovene, I've come to the conclusion(correct me if wrong) that 5'9", 5'10" and 5'11" are all average for a Caucasian man. So yeah 175-181 is average in the west, 182,183 and 184(6') is the start of tall.
nick said on 13/Oct/17
First of all nobody claims height in shoes.If tom has claimed 5'10" then he has to be 5'10" simple.He knows his height not anyone else.See his above photo with Cameron dias in 4.5" heels...she is 5'9" and tom is not standing straight...cameron would be 6"2" and tom 5'10"...very simple to judge.
Ethan Couch said on 12/Oct/17
He’s the same height as me I’m like 5’6 or 5’7
Shredder said on 12/Oct/17
LOL would love to see his 5'10 barefoot claim.
HonestSlovene said on 12/Oct/17
He is on the shorter side, now he of course isn't shockingly short, but since he wears lifts to premieres 24/7 and constantly play macho characters in his movies it's only logical people would make fun of his napoleon complex. I'd say 5'7"-5'8" range is fine, 2 inches below average in the US.
andre said on 11/Oct/17
168cm barefoot at night
Harris said on 11/Oct/17
I think 5'7.5" to 5'8" is more likely for Cruise than 5'7" is. He's at a mere average height, so I really don't get the whole "Cruise is shockingly short" thing...he never gave a particularly tall impression to me in the first place, or a short impression either. I'd say Rob's 172 cm listing is reasonable.
Rising - 174 cm said on 10/Oct/17
Thanks, Rob. I've made that point consistently. The press just decided Cruise was 5'7" and it got repeated enough that I've even seen it written in papers "Cruise is officially 5 feet 7" which will make many think he's even shorter.

On the subject of Tom's actual height, watching Mission Impossible 4 Ghost Protocol a while back, I noticed Simon Pegg was taller by perhaps an inch, but no more while Jeremy Renner looked like he was a bit taller than Cruise as well. So I guess the relatively short co-stars made it so they didn't need to go to great lengths to make Cruise look taller. Though I'm sure he must have used lifts to measure up fairly to Paula Patton in heels as you can see here at least, they weren't using boards in this shot: Click Here Even the heel looks pretty decent.

As for Tom's height, I do think he can actually look as tall as 5'8.5", even 5'9" at times meaning he'd measure about 177 cm in his biggest footwear, but if he's wearing 2.3" elevators at times then that puts him back around the 5'7.5" barefoot I've long guessed most probable. He'd probably hit about 5'8.5"-5'8.75" in normal shoes if I'm right.

@adam: Provide a link to this supposed claim or at least give us the time period this alleged Time Magazine interview was done. But even if he did claim 5'10", that doesn't mean he is. It's difficult for me to believe you're not trolling unless you've never heard of a lie? I'm pretty sure the only time Cruise said he was 5'10" was in character in All The Right Moves. If he's deviated from 5'9" then I'd be less surprised if he said 5'8" considering how frequently he was described that height along with 5'9" in the 80's and 90's.
Editor Rob
generally in the 80's he was called 5ft 9 or 8, I think a fair few mentions of both, but a few 5ft 7's creeped in and over time it has been the most common figure.

in this photo with Jerry Click Here he's wearing some sort of decent boot...

at times he pulled off looking 5ft 9 to people I'm sure.
Spencer said on 9/Oct/17
5'6'75 could be good for him, 5'8.5" with his regular boots with a inch more.
adam said on 9/Oct/17
I still remember his interview with the time mag. where he said he is 5'10" without shoes.So he has to be 5'10".
Parker said on 8/Oct/17
Editor Rob: Tom Cruise officially claims 5 feet 9 inches and a consistent 147 pounds through the 80's.

Granted he never mentioned if this was barefoot or in shoes :)

I personally think he would measure 5'9 in standard footwear, so it wouldn't have been a lie would it?
Editor Rob
if you are 'called out' by someone, you can always use the old 'oh, I meant 5ft 9 in shoes' line to save grace!

no actor should be afraid to state their real barefoot height on their never know, that honesty may pay off.
McLovin said on 8/Oct/17
1.68 without shoes, 1.72 with his regular boots.
adam said on 8/Oct/17
5'10" is the correct height for this man...he everywhere claims it...when he has himself claimed he is 5'10" then we will have to agree with him.
Editor Rob
Tom Cruise officially claims 5 feet 9 inches and a consistent 147 pounds through the 80's.

Granted he never mentioned if this was barefoot or in shoes :)
Warren said on 7/Oct/17
Would be ur height at his peak Rob? if he's 5'7.75" now, I think his peak's taller than Justin Bieber
Editor Rob
Tom may have lost a very small amount, that isn't really noticeable, like 1/8th or so.
hardguy said on 7/Oct/17
I go with 5'8
Pete said on 7/Oct/17
What I have seen, the best proof of Cruise's height is Big Jay saying Tom is max his height, which means max 171-172 cm. So I think that rules out the possibility of 5'8 / 173 cm.
I also think we have to admit that Tom knows how to look taller. For example, take a look at the picture with Leonardo Dicaprio: Tom is using some extra in his shoes and standing totally straight. Leonardo is not so concentrated on his height, he might be standing few cm under his max height.
We shouldn't underestimate Tom's skills to look taller. If he can do his stunts by himself (like hanging off a flying plane), it's not a big deal for him to use 5 cm heels in his shoes and make it look pretty normal :)
Most of us think Tom is between 170-173 cm. But when comparing Tom with other movie stars we have remember that it's quite easy to look 5 cm taller and usually people are not so obsessed with their height and might even look few cm shorter they really are.
So based on what I have seen, my guess is that Tom reaches 171 cm in morning, drops to 170 cm during the day and a bit under 170 in the night.
Vibram said on 5/Oct/17
I agree with 170cm barefoot. 175cm with boots and insert lift while filming. He looks compact. Probably a 30" inseam.
Eddard said on 5/Oct/17
5'7.5 with lifts, weak 5'6 is a legit claim for him
Jeremy Pivin said on 4/Oct/17
c'mon guys, he's average! Tom being short is just a myth that started when he was shown next to Iceman, Slider & mother Goose.
If you carefully watch him in Oblivion, he holds up pretty well next to Morgan Freeman and he towers over his female co-stars!
and noooooo, they're not exactly shortish. So give it a rest already and let the Cruiseman be all that he can be. Thank you and have a nice day '_'
Peter181cm said on 3/Oct/17
In movies he look 5'9 - 5'10
But yeah, he is between 5'7 - 5'8
More like 5'7.5 - 5'7.75 ;-)
Pierre said on 3/Oct/17
Big Jay in my memory was writing he was looking max his height.Big Jay is 171/172 range in my memory.It was an event.The question is =what is the probability he was wearing little lifts this day=big probability imo(not very important if he's under or over 5"7' because he's very charismatic).
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Oct/17
Interesting, Rob. I guessed the boots Tom was wearing to the Knight and Day Tokyo premiere and Jerry Bruckheimer's Walk of Fame ceremony to be 2.3" range, but I agree, Tom usually looks to wear more 1.8"-2" elevator shoes.
TechoF?s said on 30/Sep/17
Hey Rob, only the midsole itself gives 2.5 inches or the overall shoe?
Editor Rob
the overall shoe might give slightly less, but it could still be 2.3-2.4 range (ones sold as 2.5 inch).
Height Professor said on 30/Sep/17
Rob, how much height could 2.5 inches elevator shoe give from dons footwear?
Editor Rob
if they are using the 'midsole tech' then closer to 2.5 than 2 inch.

2.5 is a huge height in any case for a shoe, if I wear one of the older Dons which were billed I believe 2.75 (and gave 2.3ish inches) people notice the difference. 1/2 or 3/4 increases aren't going to be picked upon, but over an inch gain (over your normal 1 inch shoe) means many will pick up on it.

Tom in last 5 years has on a couple of occasions looked to wear a 2.3 elevator, but a lot of time I don't think he is in anything obvious.
Spencer said on 29/Sep/17
Looks 171-72 cm. 5'7.5"
Anonymous said on 27/Sep/17
I think he is between 171 cm -173cm. 172 cm maybe.
TechoF?s said on 26/Sep/17
Rob, are timberland 6 inch and airmax sequent gives the same height? My airmax gives 3.5 cm i wonder if timberland 6 inch would give more
Editor Rob
some of the new Timberland can seem to give 1.5 inches
John said on 24/Sep/17
Hollywood must be full of giants if he is considered short at nearly 5'8
Rising - 174 cm said on 24/Sep/17
You don't lose 2.5" in 2 years at any age without some horrific injury and major surgery, much less in your 30s. You didn't measure him correctly otherwise, or he had goth boots on the first time.
MJKoP said on 22/Sep/17
LOL...I actually entered that last comment before Parker's had even appeared. Great minds? :D
GP said on 22/Sep/17
@Rising: why do you feel the need to insult me by saying that I need to work on my reading comprehension? I'm not insulting you at all or even picking on you. I only point out the facts.

But like you said my comments came off to you a certain way that it hurt your feelings, that's your issue since I didn't intend to be rude or obnoxious, so again don't read posts like they are somehow an attack on you.

I read your long post and didn't wanna go too much into analyzing your judgement especially the part where you don't take hair into consideration, you must be joking then? Actors have been using hairstyles to give themselves extra advantage. And I'm not sure if you work on film or with film, angles do tricks that will change complete perception. Top actors even have firm of publicists that handpick the photos and even their own teams take the photos to make sure their clients look the best.

You need to realize that every person writes differently, some write fast and short, and some, like yourself write long essays. I'm glad that you have lot of free time to type for hours, but unfortunately I don't have your luxury.

You know, I have noticed that you constantly pick arguments with other posters by construing their comments and then trying to act like you were the victim and somehow people need to apologize.

I would expect that since you have lot of time to do research and write essays, then at least get the facts correct because otherwise when you post a photo like the one with Cruise and Newman and don't mention the facts, instead you say Cruise looks taller, then you lose credibility.

Warren said on 22/Sep/17
He's not that old yet
Rising - 174 cm said on 20/Sep/17
@GP: The height part is lighthearted, but not being spoken to in a condescending manner. That will annoy almost anyone and subvert the lighthearted tone in general. And it does appear you need to work on reading comprehension because like I said, this is not the first time you've read only a portion and made an assumption that could be shown to be erroneous by accompanying words or sentences. The rest of your comment is completely irrelevant because I acknowledged I erred in considering the conditions of the scene I posted a still from because I didn't catch Newman leaning against the shelf before. That's not the issue here. I can't speak for your intention, but I can say how that post came off to me and I don't think my interpretation was unreasonable.
MisterManletMick said on 20/Sep/17
I think he might have been close to 5 ft 9 when he was younger and shrunk down to 5 ft 6 or 7 as he got older, people forget he is becoming a old man and peoples spines compress as they age.
GP said on 19/Sep/17
@Rising, its funny that you are telling me to work on my reading comprehension and alleging that I was typing the message with an obnoxious and insolent manner. You should follow your own advice and don't read too much into it. You're applying too much emotion to this, since you should know that's pretty silly being here for 10 years. As you said, it's supposed to be light-hearted. And we are not trying to solve complicated formulas, it's just discussing other people's heights. This is why I barely post anything nowadays. Everyone wants to be right, I guess that was always the case, ha!!
Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Sep/17
@GP: First of all, I have watched the film, which is why I brought it up and should have been obvious based on all the details I knew such as Cruise's Cuban heels - which on another glance, look the same size as my 2" Cubans - as well as Newman's shoes, which I also mentioned were shown to be normal when he's lying on the bed in the hotel, the fact I mentioned that after those first couple of scenes, Newman seemed taller most of the rest of the film and I mentioned Cruise didn't seem that much taller than Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio. I didn't think of the leaning as it's easy enough to see before Cruise walks over and shakes Newman's hand, but from the angle where they're face to face, it's tough to tell, especially if you didn't take cognizance of that fact before Cruise approached Newman so I actually appreciate that information, but certainly not the obnoxious, insolent way you said it. As I said, it was a mystery to me why he looked that tall, but now finding the scene online to rewatch, I can see more of their heights when Newman moves around a bit and I can see the camera angle was advantageous to Cruise. In fact, looking at those early scenes again right now, I see Newman leaning on another occasion when they're packing as well as another angle that favors Cruise. They shoot it in a way that makes Cruise seem as tall the first 45 minutes or so, but even if you can tell the early scenes are the result of clever camera angles when watching closely, Cruise can still look closer than he should to Newman's height at times. I never include someone's hair in my judgement, but considering 2" Cubans will add maybe 1.75" in actual height, Cruise's footwear as far as we know will only give him about a 2 cm advantage over Newman unless Cruise had an extra lift inside. Though in other scenes, he does look noticeably shorter.

This isn't the first time you've done this sort of thing so why don't you work on your reading comprehension? More helpful advice would be to remember the light-hearted tone this site is meant to have and maintain.

As for Cruise, I haven't even been arguing he's as tall as 172 cm. I believe he's most likely 5'7.5" seeing him with men in the 5'7.25"-5'7.5" range like Spielberg, Bruckheimer and Lewis Hamilton, perhaps even 171 cm if that's how tall Hamilton is. He does sometimes give a genuinely taller impression, though so I can see why Rob has him 172 cm, but like I said, my guess has been consistently 5'7.5" for a while. I personally don't see much chance of a 5'7" flat Cruise, but that's just me. As for Newman, I've thought for a while he was more 5'9" than 5'10", especially seeing him about Spielberg's height at age 77 when Road to Perdition was released and then 5'7" at best by age 80, maybe even 169-170 range by the end of his life. But I'm open to Rob's 5'9.5" listing seeing him look so close to Redford and Robert Shaw in The Sting(who I think are both about 5'10" or 177-178 cm) and at least as tall as McQueen in The Towering Inferno(who I'm convinced was 5'9.5" barefoot). Plus, I believe Newman claimed 5'10.5" to an interviewer in 1986 so that could have been a shoe height, which implies either 5'9.25" or 5'9.5". So I can see a good chance of anything from 5'9" to 5'9.5" as I think the older actors can be tougher to nail down since we're more dependent on films. Though considering how much Newman must have shrunk in his 70s and 80s, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he had lost a fraction by age 60.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 18/Sep/17
Guys, I was talking about Brad Pitt who someone below called 172cm max....not Cruise! Just clearing that up
James B said on 18/Sep/17
Rob an American friend of mine back in 2004 or 2005 said to me he saw Tom cruise at supermarket in LA and commented he was really short like around my height and I was only 5'6-5'7 back then.
Editor Rob
I'm sure Tom has been estimated in person from 5ft 4 to 5ft 10
Warren said on 18/Sep/17
Almost the same height as James Corden without lifts I'd think
Click Here
Slim said on 18/Sep/17
MJKoP said on 17/Sep/17
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Sep/17
I think even 5ft10 is underselling him. I doubt he ever drops under 179-179.5cm at his low and 180cm is still a reasonable guess.

But good God 172cm?!

Is this some sort of non-sequitur joke? Tom could possibly be a legit 5'8"(173), but almost certainly no more than that. 172 is extremely reasonable- and in fact most likely- which is why Rob lists him as such, and has so for more than a decade.
Rampage is defending brad Pitts listing, a visitor(troll) says brad is 172.
MJKoP said on 17/Sep/17
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Sep/17
I think even 5ft10 is underselling him. I doubt he ever drops under 179-179.5cm at his low and 180cm is still a reasonable guess.

But good God 172cm?!

Is this some sort of non-sequitur joke? Tom could possibly be a legit 5'8"(173), but almost certainly no more than that. 172 is extremely reasonable- and in fact most likely- which is why Rob lists him as such, and has so for more than a decade.
Slim said on 17/Sep/17
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Sep/17
I think even 5ft10 is underselling him. I doubt he ever drops under 179-179.5cm at his low and 180cm is still a reasonable guess.

But good God 172cm?!
Don't feed the trolls.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 16/Sep/17
I think even 5ft10 is underselling him. I doubt he ever drops under 179-179.5cm at his low and 180cm is still a reasonable guess.

But good God 172cm?!
GP said on 15/Sep/17
Rising, you clearly haven't watched the Color of Money? That photo of them two in the market, Newman leans on the shelf, Cruise is wearing 2" cubans, has puffed up hair, camera is closer to him. I would suggest you watch the movie. Newman was most likely about 5'9", wore pretty thin heeled shoes and didn't have a good posture. Tom constantly looked about 1.5"-2" shorter in the scenes when he doesn't have the advantage of the camera. 172cm or almost 5'8" person should not look about 2" shorter than a 175cm/5'9" person since he has shoe, hair and posture advantage.
Brad said on 12/Sep/17
How did he pull that taller than Newman shot by the toys?
Rich simons said on 12/Sep/17
Tom Cruise is absolutely without a doubt the most handsome man to ever walk on hollywood

That being said, his stature is compact
He does well on lifts, but when we compare him in casual moments next to his girls and other people, you can see the guy is about 168cm-170cm

Katie Holmes is not even 5'9 and Tom is at least 4cm shorter

Still the biggest superstar in hollywood tho
Arch Stanton said on 12/Sep/17
Moris said on 10/Sep/17
Pitt is 172 175cm max tall (barefoot). he seems taller than these measurements because of his particular shape: wide shoulders and thin muscular frame.

You know, reading this, there is only one hope I need to cling on to, it is that you are joking. Yes he's sometimes seen in heels but in fairness, he stills appears taller than average even when bulked up massively, and quite aesthetically in Troy. A 5 ft 8 Pitt would have just looked square with all that added jazz, instead he looked absolutely statuesque/semi-godly. He completely looked the part and slipped effortleslly into the role like it was a bespoke fit. Something a 5'8ish actor, like Cruise for instance, would have found more of a challenge.
Pitt cannot be under 5'10. That is, beyond the shadows of the wildest possible doubt, his absolute lowest height. When you claim Pitt is 170-175, it's just absurd to my eyes. and it pains me to say, a manifestation of what I can only construe to be envy.
Moris said on 10/Sep/17
Pitt is 172 175cm max tall (barefoot). he seems taller than these measurements because of his particular shape: wide shoulders and thin muscular frame.
Darius said on 10/Sep/17
He is a legit 171 cm(5'7.25") guy. Maybe give or take a quarter.
Rising - 174 cm said on 9/Sep/17
I was surprised Cruise in Cuban heels pulled off close to a 60-61 year old Paul Newman in The Color of Money. In fact, in a couple of early scenes, Cruise even looked a bit taller, such as the scene this still was taken from: Click Here Although neither are wide shots and Newman then looked taller to me for the rest of the movie and you can see at one point on the bed in the hotel that he has normal shoes not more than 1"-1.25" range and at times, Cruise really didn't look that much taller than 5'5" Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, who had probably 3" type heels. But in general, I'd say it's another film Cruise looks more average than short in.
thatguy said on 9/Sep/17
If you see him on the James corded show he was like 2 inches shorter...I think he forgot his lifts but he was right next to corded for several shots and he was clearly shorter...I always believed 5 7 5 8 but after that I'm leaning to 5'6 5' really should check it jaw dropped...
Arch Stanton said on 6/Sep/17
Tony said on 5/Sep/17
His body proportions look like that of a 5'6 stature. His shoes look ridiculous, you can clearly tell he wears huge elevator shoes that add him about 4 inches. 5'6 1/2 at most, he doesn't appear to look close to 5'8 and his "5'9" claim is ridiculous.

Don't agree, if you really look at him he has the body frame of a guy nearer 5 ft 8, regardless of footwear.
Rising - 174 cm said on 5/Sep/17
I suspect Sigourney may have been taller than a flat 5'11". Perhaps more like 181 cm, possibly even 5'11.5".

I think dishonest is the wrong word for rounding as well because it implies some intention to deceive, but many just really don't think the fraction matters.
Tony said on 5/Sep/17
His body proportions look like that of a 5'6 stature. His shoes look ridiculous, you can clearly tell he wears huge elevator shoes that add him about 4 inches. 5'6 1/2 at most, he doesn't appear to look close to 5'8 and his "5'9" claim is ridiculous.
Pierre said on 2/Sep/17
Click Here Tom Skerritt and 5"11' Sigourney weaver
hardguy said on 1/Sep/17
more than ron weasley imo
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 1/Sep/17
If anything, it's a bit more honest for somebody who is a solid 5'10 1/2" to claim to be 5'11" as they'll probably measure up over 5'11" at some point during the day. Will they measure up at 5'10", however? No, they will not.
Celebheights 6'1.5 said on 1/Sep/17
@Otis Most people don't bother with fractions. It's actually just as dishonest for somebody who is 5'10 1/2" to claim to be 5'10" as it is for them to claim to be 5'11", despite the fact that fewer people will call somebody on it (as opposed to somebody who rounds up). Back when I thought that '6'1 1/2"' sounded lame, I always claimed to be 6'2". Now I always refer to myself as being 6'1 1/2".
Brad said on 31/Aug/17
He doesn't look short from a foot away. At 5' 8" or 5' 7 3/4" if you want with posture he looked hardly "short" to me almost 25 years ago. Normal footwear.
Pierre said on 27/Aug/17
Picture Anonymous 26/August/17=Tom Skerritt is listed 5"9.5' by the picture next to Rob and estimation of peak 5"11' in this site,Tom Cruise is closer to the camera.
Anonymous said on 26/Aug/17
Top Gun behind the scenes
Click Here
blazer said on 26/Aug/17
He's not as short as 5'7. Probably about 5'7.5!
Peter175 said on 24/Aug/17
The meme of Tom cruise being short came from the precise fact that he isn't really that short.

If he were a sub5'7 man, there would be no need whatsoever to try to prove he's short or belittle him. Guys like Bono, Al Pacino, Zac Efron, James Dean and a few others; everyone knows their short and no one cares. Tom Cruise is a guy who can look 5'11 on TV and then you see him getting dwarfed by his leggy wives. If Tom appeared shorter in film I'm certain no one would care about his height. The fact that he goes from 5'11 to 5'6 in the eyes of the public creates the intrigue.

he was nearly 5'8 in his youth
TheChemSpark said on 24/Aug/17
Hey Rob, if Cruise is a weak 5'8 (172cm) then why is he listed as 5'7 (170cm)?
randomuser said on 22/Aug/17
He isn't short at all if he's really 172 cm. That's exactly average for a man in Los Angeles.
Otis said on 21/Aug/17
Rob,why do people round their heights so much, I notice even doctors do it. I was measured at 5'11 but I am 5'10 and a half. Is the world just full of people that exaggerate about their real height??
Editor Rob

With something like height, maybe people feel there's no need to be 'that precise', so rounding to the nearest inch makes sense to them
Slim183 said on 21/Aug/17
Anonymos, let's take this to the general page before trolls infest this.
Pierre said on 20/Aug/17
Tom around 5"8' barefoot want to say Tom about 5"11' or just under in good shoes....imo you can forget 5"8' or just under
CGS said on 19/Aug/17
How do you know exactly how tall he is? I thought that he is 5 foot 7
Anonymous said on 19/Aug/17

Except Rob is talking about the average of the male population, he isn't talking about one small group as that would be a totally different discussion.

You can't just say white guys between 18-40 are 5'10" and try to pass that off as some kind of average for the population in the UK.

5'9" is average there so he is right in that people say 5'7" are short while on the other end of the spectrum you have people even saying 6' is average.

Tom for instance is called short and even ridiculed by the media while he is almost 5'8" which for his generation is just lower average.
MJKoP said on 17/Aug/17
Junior said on 16/Aug/17
I believe in the 5 foot 7 myth for Tom.

LOL, please tell me that was meant as a joke! XD
Junior said on 16/Aug/17
I believe in the 5 foot 7 myth for Tom.
Slim183 said on 16/Aug/17
Editor Rob: I think under 5ft 8 towards 5ft 7-7.5 is the lower end and probably upper end of short in the UK.

It's strange because I think people think more of a guy at 5ft 7 being short than a guy at 5ft 11 being tall...

If non white males and elderly were removed from those statistics, the average median would be 5'10 for sure, so average is closer to 5'11 than 5'7 these days. 1 inch above average doesn't stand out from the crowd much, but with boots/stealth shoes, it's okay, but without them, I'd choose 6'2 over 5'11 anyday.
Rising - 174 cm said on 13/Aug/17
Well, if it's any consolation, I'm sure Sly appreciated you giving him your 3 mm for his peak height. Tom must like the extra mm as well, but he still won't tell you how tall he is if you ask!
Adamz said on 13/Aug/17
Editor Rob: yes, the upper range of average in America...which some might argue continues into 5ft 11, before transitioning into tall at maybe 5ft 11.5-6ft zone

Rob, here you talk about the "upper range of average"

Can you please shed light on what the inverse would be? I.e. "lower range of average"

Where does this start for white men in USA?
Editor Rob
I think under 5ft 8 towards 5ft 7-7.5 is the lower end and probably upper end of short in the UK.

It's strange because I think people think more of a guy at 5ft 7 being short than a guy at 5ft 11 being tall...

Rising - 174 cm said on 12/Aug/17
@Rob: Yeah, it shouldn't take most long to figure out you list people in height and inches and then show the cm equivalent for it. I'm sure Russell Crowe would appreciate the change.
Editor Rob
I lost 3mm 😡

I can see some actors visiting their page and their heartbeat rising rapidly as they think they got a downgrade or an upgrade 😁
Rising - 174 cm said on 11/Aug/17
As I told Rob when I first noticed it on the Mel Gibson page, I like the change a lot. It's especially useful for listings that wind up between such as when someone was say 5'7.5" and would see a 171 cm next to their name instead of 171.5 or 5'9.5" and saw a 177 next to their name instead of 176.5. It could be hard to tell if posters meant when they'd say 171 or 177 in those instances. Incidentally, I've had Tom at 171.5 cm for a while now myself.
Editor Rob
the actual feet/inches don't change, just a difference in the centimetres.

A lot of the 1/4 inches shared the same cm mark because of rounding...5ft 7.25 and 7.5 or 8 / 8.25 etc...
Richard said on 10/Aug/17
Hey Rob why now various height aren't rounded?
For example 5'7.75" before 172 cm and now 172,1 cm or 5'8" before 173 cm and now are 172,7 cm. Is it for the conversion from feet to centimeters or to be more precise?
Editor Rob
it helps to match up with how the average vote is being displayed (1 decimal place for metric).
Rising - 174 cm said on 9/Aug/17
@Pierre: Rob saw Stewart in person around the time Stewart was said and Rob guessed him only about 5'8" while people often remark Katie is tall. I've heard her guessed as tall as 5'10". She's obviously not that tall, but anything from 174-175 cm range is fair, imo. I don't really think Rob will be off on a listing by a full inch.

@Slim 182 cm: I wouldn't argue below 171 either, but he could be 171 since Lewis Hamilton measured that height and I wouldn't guess Cruise was taller than Hamilton. In fact, seeing Cruise with Hamilton as well as Spielberg(171.5) and Bruckheimer(also 171) has made me believe Cruise is just about the same height as those guys. I think it's best to put the most weight into comparisons between people of similar height. I wouldn't say Tom is closer to 5'8" than 5'7" because he really doesn't usually look that much taller than 5'8" even with lifts, perhaps 5'8.5".
Height Professor said on 8/Aug/17
5'7 barefoot 5'10 with heels
Pierre said on 8/Aug/17
@Rising=take in consideration the peak of the head not the hairs,and the floor seem to be a little inclined in favor to Katie...Her head is looking upward=i wouldn't bet one dollar she's taller than him
Slim 182 cm said on 7/Aug/17
I wouldn't argue below 171. He was edged out by Johnny Depp despite his lifts pushing him up on his toes.
Rising - 174 cm said on 7/Aug/17
@Pierre: Stewart is no taller than 5'8" these days while Katie looks at least 5'8.5" to me so I'd put money on her being taller.
Pierre said on 7/Aug/17
@Rising=For me Katie is at the best of the best the same height as Patrick Stewart,very probably a little under.
Rising - 174 cm said on 6/Aug/17
There's no way of knowing if you're in the same part of your stride. Mid-stride pics are simply bad for height comparisons and the example I used was even indoors. If you insist on this, I can literally keep going with mid-stride pics. Rob said the same when the pic of Pitt looking much shorter than Edward Norton was posted and I didn't even realize they were walking until Rob said that!
Pierre said on 6/Aug/17
@Rising=of course if you are not in the same step ,not in the same plan, not in the same posture(Kurt is slouching)
MJKoP said on 5/Aug/17
Marquis said on 4/Aug/17
5'7" flat guy is still 5'7".

Not Cruise. ;)
errybodyshutup said on 5/Aug/17
why do people think he is short? im ****ing short at 169
Marquis said on 4/Aug/17
5'7" flat guy is still 5'7".
Rising - 174 cm said on 3/Aug/17
@Pierre: Well that's your problem then as that will lead to inaccurate estimates if you really think stills taken mid-stride can tell you someone's height. Stallone and Russell weren't power walking to the shower in Tango and Cash. Please explain to me why Stallone looks 2 inches taller in the first still and Russell is at least as tall, arguably taller in the 2nd: Click Here Those were taken about a second apart.

You go up and down as you walk, it's not complicated. You're not the first to make that mistake, I admitted I did in the past, but you seem to have trouble admitting your mistakes.

As for Cruise, definitely 5'7.5", imo. He can easily look 5'8"-5'8.5" with thicker footwear or even a weak 5'9" with lifts and posture. He can reach 177 cm range in 6 cm type elevator boots.
Richard said on 3/Aug/17
Rob, I'm a fan of Tom Cruise but you should admit he can be 5'7.75" (172 cm) after he woke up, 5'7.5" (171 cm) during the day and 5'7" (170-170,5 cm) in the evening.

I add that He has a stocky upper body, do you think that caused him appear on the 5'6"-5'7"?
Editor Rob
various factors can make people seem tall/short in photos. Cruise doesn't seem to me like how a 5ft 6 guy would look.
Mathew Robinson said on 2/Aug/17
@Johan - Yep best bet for Tom is in that 171 cm range.
Pierre said on 2/Aug/17
@Rising=I don't agree with you sorry but they are around the same distance to the camera,the picture is very clear, the angle is good even if they walk they are in the same step and this is not a power walk wich could give them a significative difference of height.And they are very close one of the other one then i think your arguments are very questionable.
Pierre said on 2/Aug/17
Click Here = by considering Patrick Stewart(5"8' in this site) has not hairs but a high forehead he look taller than her at the peak of their head,they have around the same posture but Katie's head is clearly looking upward so give her a little advantage imo.Only the difference of shoes can disadvantage her.By this picture i can doubt she's taller than him with all this parameters(and the floor seem to be a little inclined in favor of Katie)
Johan said on 2/Aug/17
Don't see the big deal with Holmes and Stewart she has 0.5 inch slip ons and he has an inch shoe which we see from the second pic. She is still taller than him with 0.5 inch less shoe but its hard to judge as they are in mid stride and the pavement could have a slope, it sure looks like it.

Still puts Katie at min 5'8.5" and she isn't a full inch over Tom in some of those pics most I have seen in the past is 1.5 inch between them in sneakers.

Just confirms for me that Tom is 5'7" + . I would say its a toss up between 5'7.5"-5'7.75". I don't see 5'7" flat or 5'8" range unless he has thicker footwear. With lifts he can pass for a legit 5'9" guy - reaching 5'10" in footwear.
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Aug/17
@Pierre: I stand corrected on the shoes. That's a pretty tiny heel, but I would have guessed those shoes 1/4" before seeing it, so perhaps 1 cm, possibly a little more depending on the insole. But my statement on walking pics needs no amendment. People go up and down as they walk and if you take stills, the heights can vary at least 2 inches. This was proven years ago on the Stallone page when the clip from Tango and Cash of Stallone and Kurt Russell walking to the shower was posted. I took stills where Stallone looked a couple inches taller while another poster took stills where Kurt could even look a bit taller. That's too big a variation, and keep in mind, this was indoors, while your photos are outdoors. You can only get a general idea of how tall someone is from that, but you can't determine whether someone is 174 or 175 from mid-stride photos.

Case in point: Click Here Click Here Now we know Katie is taller than that next to Tom since they look about the same height there with similar shoes.

We can save a lot of time if we take all mid-stride photos with a grain of salt.
Slim 182 cm said on 2/Aug/17
I take that back, I was proved tom isn't 5'8. He's lucky to have such a listing.
Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
Click Here =not only 1/4 shoes imo,she has little heels,of course Patrick has very probably an advantage of he really exactly 5"8' barefoot...They have around the same posture in the first pic i post, and the floor seem flat then i don't see where's really the problem,in some pictures you post celebrities have not always the same posture even if they don't walk...and not always the same advantage of shoes ...
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Aug/17
Even if it was 2 inches, that would make Tom 5'7.25"-5'7.5" when we consider Katie's sandals, but I don't see 2 inches there personally. I don't get what that Stewart is supposed to show. You can't judge height from still photos taken while two people are walking. Besides, even if we were to foolishly ignore this, she looks as tall as him with significantly less footwear as she just has 1/4" type flats while Stewart has at least 2 cm shoes.
Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
Click Here Katie Holmes and Patrick Stewart listed 5"8' in this site
Peter175 said on 31/Jul/17
She looks 2 inches taller than him in the barefoot pic
Pierre said on 31/Jul/17
Or Leornardo isn't really 5"11' range=next to Barack Obama(pictures,video in web) he look lot's of time easily more than 2 inches shorter than him
Chris said on 30/Jul/17
Rob are celeb estimations based on an evening height measurement or a midday measurement?
Editor Rob
think of afternoon
Rising - 174 cm said on 30/Jul/17
Tom seemed just slightly shorter than 5'8" Sean Penn in Taps - roughly half an inch - any opinions on this? I think it's probably the best of Ton's early films to judge his height from considering how well known Penn is. I think it's become increasingly obvious Tom isn't quite 5'8", but he's not really far from it. He's only a bit shorter than 5'8" guys and to a typical person would probably look the same height standing with one.

Btw, here's Tom with Simon Pegg, who looks to only have 1.5 cm shoes: Click Here They're almost identical, but Tom seems to edge him out if anything, albeit with better posture. But I noticed the angle of Tom's shoe and the back and thought there was a chance of an elevator shoe and then found this sitting photo, which seems to confirm my suspicions: Click Here My guess is Tom was the same height or a hair taller with 3.5 cm more footwear.

Here they are again, this time, Tom has boots while Pegg has maybe 1" shoes, but obviously no lifts as you can see his ankle is normal
Video: Click Here
Full photos: Click Here Click Here

They're so close in height in that footwear, either can look a hair taller depending on who the camera favors. I would guess Pegg standing a fraction taller as he has a tendency to hold looser posture and bend his knees a bit. I do think Tom has lifts in his boots, but then he's looking at least 5'8.5" if Pegg is the 5'8.75" Rob lists him. Of course, Pegg emphatically claims 5'10"! This would be believable if Cruise were actually 5'9", but these comparisons show Tom can pass for a strong 5'8" in a typical elevator and a weak 5'9" in bigger boots. As for Tom's height claim, I have wondered if he's lowered his claim, but the fact that you can't even ask him doesn't seem like it to me. It seems that Tom doesn't want to put a figure on his height publicly anymore. Perhaps he thinks it's better to just appear taller than people think he is. I can't blame him. If Tom were to come out and claim 5'9" today, it'd receive a ton of scrutiny from rags like the Daily Mail. I had actually thought Mark Wahlberg would have lowered that ridiculous 5'10" claim from 1995 that nobody could possibly believe and would go with a more reasonable 5'9" or even 5'8.5", but much to my surprise, Marky Mark repeated the 5'10" claim a few years ago!
lasla said on 30/Jul/17
rob, could tom cruise drop to 171cm at ninght in his peak?
MJKoP said on 29/Jul/17
Thanks, Pete....err, Parker(Spiderman?). That is exactly the set of pics I was referring to. But I'm sure Cruise had lifts implanted beneath the soles of his feet, cuz he HAS to be 5'7" or under, right?
Rising - 174 cm said on 29/Jul/17
Yes, good find, Pete. I don't know if Katie's sandals add 1/4" or 1/2" since I don't own any sandals, but it's certainly more than Tom's bare feet, unless, of course, Tom's feet are actually hi-tech elevator shoes! If we assume Katie is between her 5'8" and 5'9" claims and the sandals take her to 5'9" then the shortest Tom looks to me would be a very solid 5'7", but I think he looks more 5'7.5". Now if Katie is 5'9" in bare feet as Rob lists her then of course you can raise that a bit. You can use the big guy's head in the background as a reference. Tom's head is above his nose and below his eyes, but closer to his eyes.Katie's head is at the top of his eyebrows, possibly just above. The front shots show you roughly how much extra hair they have, at least insofar as we can guess this without actually flattening their hair under a stadiometer. Only if we lower Katie an inch from Rob's listing to 5'8" could Tom look less than 5'7".
Richard said on 29/Jul/17
Hi Rob, you saw Cruise-Holmes photos?
If in those photos Katie Holmes is 176 cm then Tom Cruise is between 171-172 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
He can't be 5'8" because 1-1.5" or 2,5-3 cm a that distance would be very little but Holmes looks at least 1.6"/4 cm taller and if they were straight she can be 2"/5 cm
Again if you look Cruise's shoes are slightly higher than DiCaprio, and you can also notice that the shoes has lifts inside of 2-3 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
If Cruise is a good 176-177 cm here then barefoot he could be 171-172 cm.
Rob what do you think of a 5'7.5"-5'7.75", at most, Cruise?
Richard said on 29/Jul/17
Rob, If in those photos Katie Holmes is 176 cm then Tom Cruise is 1.5"-2" shorter and between 171-172 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
Again if you look Cruise's shoes are slightly higher than DiCaprio, and you can also notice that the shoes has lifts inside of 2-3 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
If Cruise is a good 176-177 cm here then barefoot he could be 171-172 cm.
What do you think of a 5'7.5"-5'7.75" Cruise?
MrFish said on 28/Jul/17
Rob, do you think that I'd be about an inch taller than Tom?
Editor Rob
if you met him at an event in normal 2cm range shoes, you might be surprised...I'm sure he'd look near your height with some of the boot/shoes he has worn recently.
Parker said on 28/Jul/17
@Pete - Yes those are the ones thank-you

Tom barefoot next to 5'9 listed Katie in a half inch sandal.
Click Here
Rising - 174 cm said on 28/Jul/17
1/4" is no insignificant I can't really dispute it, but at the same time, there's no evidence of it either. He probably always was 5'7.5". He could look either 171 or 172. I know Dmeyer agreed that Tom got 2.3"-2.5" from his boots and lifts at Bruckheimer's Hollywood walk of fame ceremony 4 years ago, but Tom only looked 1"-1.5" taller and if Bruckheimer is 171 cm and his dress shoes were 1" then that would make Tom 176-177 cm with booots and big lifts. Subtract even the low end of 2.3" from the max 5'9.75" that would make him just scraping 5'7.5". Cruise was also half an inch to an inch shorter than Johnny Depp who had over half an inch less footwear with normal 1.7" cowboy boots, but I really see Depp more 174 than 175 cm, which would also put Cruise no more than 171.5 cm. Cruise already losing height 4 years ago becomes a bit less likely, imo.

If you look at Tom with Leo last year, he could look 5'8.75"-5'9" with 2" elevators and better posture. Tom has looked taller than ever since about 2010 while in the early 2000s, he was no taller than 5'7.5" Spielberg. Look at the Tropic Thunder premiere I posted below as well, he looks 173 range in 2 cm sneakers sneakers. Or in this All The Right Moves promo pic, he actually looks more a 5'7" guy with 5'3" Lea Thompson: Click Here Funny enough, Tom's character claimed 5'10" in that movie! I always thought Tom was a good actor, but if he can play a 5'10" guy then he's a better actor than I thought! Speaking of his early movies. With a footwear advantage, he looked more a 5'7" guy with 5'6" Shelley Long in flats in Losin' It.

Like I said, it's such a minimal amount, I can't really dispute it, but at the same time, there's no actual evidence of it either so I wouldn't assume a fit guy like Tom who always has outstanding posture would lose anything while still relatively young. Sly Stallone, who is similar in that regard, made until at least his 60s, probably his mid to late 60s before losing anything. Staying fit with good posture can take you to a much older age than Tom without losing anything, but when we're talking about a 1/4", Tom's shoes vary more than that on a regular basis, as do many others so there's a reason Rob doesn't give peak heights until it's a half inch loss.
Dmeyer said on 27/Jul/17
Peak 5'7,75 now 5'7,5 0,25 loss AT mid 50s is good
MJKoP said on 27/Jul/17
" 5 feet 9 inches" was almost three decades ago. He may very well advertise himself as 5'8" today(if asked, which I heard is against the law!).
Rising - 174 cm said on 27/Jul/17
I still say right between 5'7" and 5'8" - no discernible difference between Cruise and Spielberg, Lewis Hamilton and Jerry Bruckheimer. Remember a real 5'8.5"-5'8.75" guy Jason Statham had at least an inch on him. But for the Cruise is under 5'7" crowd, since I already posted two videos of Tom and Mario Lopez, I'll post a few stills for convenience.

Valkyrie premiere: Click Here
Tom's shoes: Click Here

If Tom had lifts there, he's doing a pretty good job hiding them and looks as tall or taller than Mario!

Oblivion premiere: Click Here
Tom's shoes: Click Here Click Here

Same thing, pretty normal looking shoes, but while Tom is shorter this time, it's not by much - an inch tops - as it's difficult to tell who is taller at certain points in the video when Mario puts his head down.

So how tall would the Cruise is under 5'7" crowd say Mario is? For reference, Mario has consistently claimed to be 5'11". Now he's nowhere near that tall and like Cruise, he's also looked shorter than Statham, so I've personally concluded he's 5'8.5" and Rob lists him 5'9". He can't be far from that range yet Cruise is similar in height without obvious lifts. If Cruise is under 5'7" then what is Mario? Under 5'8"?
Slim 182 cm said on 27/Jul/17
After examining the Holmes picture, 5'8 max is plausible, I'd give him the 173 upgrade. Good listing btw,
Zach said on 26/Jul/17
Rob is it acceptable for Cruise to claim 5"8 for convience I feel he is closer to 5"8 than 5"7?
Editor Rob
I think he should claim 5ft 8.
Pierre said on 26/Jul/17
If Cameron is really 5"8'...oups
MJKoP said on 25/Jul/17
Pierre said on 25/Jul/17
Katie Holmes 5"9'?Hum...maybe.My ex-girlfriend was 5"9',she was looking taller than her with larger shoulders story, bro?
Rising - 174 cm said on 25/Jul/17
@MJKoP and Parker: Yeah, that's the photo I was talking about. I know the date and location(Australia, February 2006), but can't seem to find it either. If she's 5'9" then Tom at under 5'7" would look roughly 2.5" shorter considering her sandal. Even if she's 5'8.5", it'd still be about a 2" difference. Of course, I'd be a hypocrite to put too much stock into one photo, but if you follow the same logic some do on the Brad Pitt page, then that one pic proves Tom is taller than 5'7".

@Rob: Yeah, I'd say around Knight and Day in 2010 was when Tom's footwear seemed to grow.

Full pics: Click Here Click Here Click Here
Video: Click Here

Diaz at 5'8" would top 5'11" in those heels and perhaps reach 181 cm or come close as they seem at least 8 cm to me and she looks about 4 cm taller than Cruise in the first pic to me and more like 2 cm range in the 2nd and 3rd pics. I'd estimate the difference around 3 cm from the video, but it can look anywhere from maybe an inch all the way to 4 cm. This seems to safely put Tom at 177 range in those boots, which I'd say are about 6 cm or 2.3"-2.5" range. It's quite possible he even reaches a full 5'10" in them. So 5'7.5" looks the safest estimate barefoot there, but the 172 cm is obviously possible if those boots are only 2.3" and if he's reaching a full 5'10". Holding his own with a 5'8" woman in big heels shows he's not 5'6" range as he'd be lucky to hit 5'9" in those boots. In fact, the press remarked on how conspicuously tall Tom looked at that event.

The other period Tom's footwear was quite large was around the time he was married to Nicole Kidman, particularly towards the end when he did MI 2.
KH said on 25/Jul/17
Cruise did it to himself with all the hot tall women he has dated lol. If he had dated average sized women the 5'6 and below nonsense wouldn't be happening. People see all the pictures with him being towered by tall women in heels and make assumptions based on average sized women.
Richard said on 25/Jul/17
@Rising - 174 cm
You're right I focused on the difference between DiCaprio and Hardy and I didn't notice that detail. If you look, Cruise's shoes are slightly higher than DiCaprio, and you can also notice that the shoes has lifts inside of 2-3 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
If Cruise is a good 176-177 cm here then barefoot he could be 170-172 cm.
@Rob? Still open for a 5'7"-5'7.5" Cruise?
Nik said on 25/Jul/17
... But alas he is loaded and I am not!
Pierre said on 25/Jul/17
Katie Holmes 5"9'?Hum...maybe.My ex-girlfriend was 5"9',she was looking taller than her with larger shoulders
Nik said on 25/Jul/17
He's about the same height as me!
Harris said on 25/Jul/17
Rob, could you see Cruise being possibly the same height as you at peak?
Editor Rob
I think he had a chance of hitting 5ft 8, but not at night.
Parker said on 25/Jul/17
MJKoP said on 23/Jul/17
For the 5'6" pushers who keep crying "lifts!" and "footwear!" could someone less lazy than me dig up that candid shot of Tom completely barefoot on a boating dock standing right next to his 5'9" wife in flip-flops? Cruise is over 5'7". Deal. ,

I've looked for it numerous times - It appears to have disappeared off the net, but you are correct, Katie was in a 1/4 inch heel sandal and Tom was barefoot. IMO there was less than an inch between them.
Pierre said on 24/Jul/17
@Parker=With only shoes which are looking very classic Rob gain 2.4 inches(6.1 cm)(page=shoe lift in this site),then with a little more sophisticated and luxury shoes....
Pierre said on 24/Jul/17
@Parker=then enter"luxury elevator man shoes"
Rising - 174 cm said on 24/Jul/17
@Rob: That's true. I do think Tom went through a phase where his footwear was often pretty normal, albeit 0.7" has always been rare for him. But I would say whenever guys like Cruise, Stallone, Gibson, Diesel etc. wear boots, even boots you wouldn't think twice about if someone else were wearing them, there's always the potential for something inside them, unless you can find a shot that suggests there isn't. For instance, as soon as I saw this photo from the Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol UK premiere, I thought there's a good chance he has something in his boot: Click Here Granted, it's not obvious in other shots if this is indeed the case.

@Richard: DiCaprio looks pretty much bang on 2" taller than Hardy there, so he looks just slightly taller than Cruise, but DiCaprio is standing straighter with Hardy. Notice DiCaprio has a bow tie with Cruise, but a tie with Hardy. That's the 2016 British Academy Film Awards with Cruise and the LA premiere for the Revenant with Hardy. Here's another from the premiere, probably slightly better for comparing from this angle, but it shows basically the same thing: Click Here Leo looks pretty much exactly 2" taller than Hardy so Hardy seems maybe 0.5 cm or 1/4" taller than Cruise in comparison, but to that, another small amount should probably be added to account for posture so if Hardy is 175 cm barefoot, then I'd say Cruise passes for about 174 in those shoes. Leo can look a flat 5'11" with Hardy, so maybe he is, but 181 is probably at least as likely, if not more.
Editor Rob
Tom definitely has brought out elevators at times over last 5 years...maybe he has made the mistake of reading articles or interviews or even the Internet and noticed how often his height is a focus or a jibe.
Darius5'7" said on 24/Jul/17
I would say 5'7.5"
5'7.25" min, 5'7.75" max.
IMO Tom cruise is 100% 5'7" or above . 5'6" is impossible . I would say there is more chance of him being 5'8" than sub 5'7".
Richard said on 24/Jul/17
Hi Rob, can you see these photos?
DiCaprio with 5'9" Tom Hardy, 5'9.5" or 177 cm in dress shoes:
Click Here
Cruise, at the same event, is a good 176 cm.
Click Here
Click Here
Here you can see Tom is 7 cm shorter than DiCaprio
Click Here
DiCaprio has 2 cm dress shoes but Cruise's shoes has 3 cm and 2-3 cm lifts and you can clearly see it.
DiCaprio 183 cm in dress shoes
Cruise 176 cm, shoes+lifts (3+2 or 3)
176-3-3= 170 cm
176-3-2= 171 cm
To be generous he can be 177 cm:
177-3-3= 171 cm
177-3-2= 172 cm
Maths is maths.
He is not 168 cm but he is 170-172 cm so 171 cm is better than 172 cm.
John said on 24/Jul/17
Is 5 ft 7 in considered short or below average height, meaning, not that short?
Parker said on 24/Jul/17
@Pierre, these shoes give ~ 3" from barefoot.
Click Here

There's a limit to what 'discreet' lifts can give you. It's max 2.5" in a shoe, and even that is pushing it.
charles thenot said on 24/Jul/17
he is tall in my eyes
MJKoP said on 23/Jul/17
For the 5'6" pushers who keep crying "lifts!" and "footwear!" could someone less lazy than me dig up that candid shot of Tom completely barefoot on a boating dock standing right next to his 5'9" wife in flip-flops? Cruise is over 5'7". Deal.
Rising - 174 cm said on 23/Jul/17
@Pierre: No, I know a lot about elevator shoes and lifts. A discreet elevator shoe will add only around 2" over barefoot. That is, a discreet elevator to the trained eye, maybe less. Go to the James Kyson Lee page to see an elevator that actually gives 2.5"-3". Tom had a 2" actual gain type elevator shoe when he looked 5'8"-5'9" to Jay. See my 18/Jul/17 post for the pics. At most, those are maybe 2.3" and they are noticeable. Don't believe the height increases the elevator shoe companies claim - they measure the highest point of the back of the shoe - a supposed 4" elevator will give 3" range and down the line.

@Parker: You may be right, as I said, I'm not certain either way, but they don't look suspicious. Though as far as the Beckham picture, it could also be that Beckham has a little camera advantage. I believe Beckham is bang on 5'11" since he claimed that height and looks it next to 5'10" Michael Parkinson. I'd say Tom looked about 5'7.5" here with Beckham, possibly 172 cm as listed: Click Here

Of course, for those that worship at the altar of barefoot photos, dig up the pic of Tom barefoot and Katie in sandals in Australia back in 2006. Tom is over 5'7" in it even if Katie is only 5'8.5" since her sandals give her at least a fraction and she's not 2" taller in the photo.

That is an example of Tom without lifts and so is the Tropic Thunder premiere: Click Here
This is Tom in thick logger type boots(I suspect he may have inserted lifts in them as well): Click Here Click Here Click Here

The difference is obvious. Just look at the difference in his legs, particularly lower legs. Speaking of Ben Stiller, compare Tom and Ben in this video, especially around 2:38: Click Here

If lifts are (predictably) the defense, then I'll show you Tom in possibly subtle 2" type elevators and Ben

Pics: Click Here Click Here
Video: Click Here
Side view of shoes: Click Here
Editor Rob
it is certainly a rare occurrence to see Tom appear at a premiere in anything but a solid shoe or boot. The one time he did wear what looked an all white 0.7ish style, he naturally didn't look as tall, but still not that short either.
Parker said on 23/Jul/17
@Rising, don't disagree with anything you have written, although personally I don't believe Tom had a lift in his shoe that night. If you look at the pic with Beckham from the same night:-
Click Here
Considering the lean he looks close to 4 inches taller than Tom, wearing a GAP type boot Click Here. I imagine they would give about 1.25". I think David's a solid 5'11 (Like DeCaprio) so standing close to 6'1 if he stood straight.

Tom usually looks closer to 3 inches shorter than David
Click Here
Although I'm not sure whether Tom is doing a bit of tip toeing there?

Anyway, back to the Lions for Lambs premier, I think Tom is standing at 5'9 in his footwear and agree with you, Katie standing at ~5'9 in hers. The difference being their posture in the pics.
Pierre said on 23/Jul/17
MJKoP=Thank you for the lesson MJKoP...Leonardo is maybe not really 5"11.5' barefoot this is only his official height like Jeremy Renner is listed 5"10' in some sites...171/172 Big Jay think Tom is max his height with supposed the same shoes as him=maybe Tom is 5"7'/5"7.5' maybe more 5"6' if his shoes were a little with lifts like luxury elevator shoes which are looking very classic 2 cm shoes...(it was in a event= where generally some celebrities are wearing lifts...)
Pierre said on 23/Jul/17
@Rising said on 22/Jul/17="the 5"6' range stuff is ridiculous"=no more than 5"7' stuff imo.Imo you can go in web to see luxury elevator shoes and then you will see that it's not impossible he's 5"6' or even a little under= luxury elevator shoes are looking very discreet and even more discreet with long pants,i think you don't imagine the real height you can gain with this shoes.And compare Tom with others celebrities is very approximate,you don't know exactly their real height only their official height.
Peter175 said on 22/Jul/17
Parker, Katie is in flats and I'm certain she's bending her leg too. You can see the dent in her dress
MJKoP said on 22/Jul/17
Pierre said on 22/Jul/17
@Parker=if Leonardo is really his height in real proofs.

In order to discredit Leonardo's height for the purpose of discrediting Tom's height, you'll have to majorly downgrade literally everyone on the PLANET. Photos with people posing next to each other can be traced back to either you and/or people you know. Not to mention Rob has posed next to many celebs, and we have him being measured barefoot on VIDEO. If you really see Cruise as under 5'7", you'll have to forfeit at least a good inch of your own height to substantiate that figure.
Rising - 174 cm said on 22/Jul/17
@Pierre: If that's your opinion then fair enough, but I don't think the evidence points to that. If Tom is showing up shorter looking 170-171 in what look like normal shoes and then he looks 173-175 range with what would look like elevator shoes, the most logical conclusion is that Tom didn't have lifts when he looked a strong 5'7", especially since his elevator shoes the other day were around 2" type.

@Parker: Good points to balance the discussion, as always. As for Katie, she could very well be 5'9", but I'd also say there's at least a 50/50 chance she's 174 cm since she's also claimed 5'8". I tried looking up video from that event, but it's too short. I was hoping video would tell me if Tom was really standing taller than Katie that night, or if it was a combination of Katie slouching and Tom having a camera advantage. She looks at least as tall, if not a fraction taller: Click Here I think there's a slight tilt in Katie's favor, but she's not standing as straight. In your pic, Tom looks an inch or so taller. As for footwear, Tom's shoes don't look obviously suspicious, so I'd say a decent possibility they're normal and decent possibility he has up to a 1 inch lift inside: Click Here I'd be more inclined to defer to Rob on this one. Katie's footwear is likely 1/4" or so, but if she's as listed then she'd be 176 in them and I think it's likely Tom and Katie were standing about the same height that night with equal posture so he'd probably be at least around 5'9" in footwear. Of course, if she's 5'8.5" then things change a bit and it depends on if Tom's shoes are normal or if they have a small lift, but I wouldn't say there's much difference between them that night either way.

As for Tom and Leo, I'd say Tom has a 2 inch type elevator shoe and if Leo is 6'0" in shoes, then Tom looks 177 cm to me in footwear: Click Here Click Here It doesn't take a math prodigy to conclude 177 cm - 5 cm = 172. Of course, Tom does have better posture, but then 6'0" is a conservative guess as it assumes Leo is 5'11" flat and in 1" shoes. If he's the 181 cm Rob gives him then of course, he'd be at least 6'0.25" in those shoes. Tom clearly has better posture, but even so, it's tough to see less than maybe 176 minimum in footwear. Unfortunately, there is video, but the camera pans away around the time Tom must have congratulated Leo on stage. I'm still not seeing a flat 5'7" even considering shoes and posture with Leo since Tom's shoes could also add only 1.8" and it's not impossible Leo is as tall as 184 cm in that type of footwear.

5'7.5" is still a guess I'm comfortable with. He can seem both taller and shorter at different times. A full 5'8" and a flat 5'7" are still a little too high and low for me, respectively. But yeah, the 5'6" range stuff is ridiculous. No way he's in the same height range as Jonah Hill or Ben Stiller.
Pierre said on 22/Jul/17
@Parker=if Leonardo is really his height in real proofs.
Parker said on 22/Jul/17
NotImpressed said on 21/Jul/17
I would say he's 5'6" at best.

I think at the end of the day, no matter how much evidence is presented, the media have done their job in convincing a lot of the public Tom is 5'6 or less.

For what its worth, a strong 5'6 man in normal dress shoes would be at about Leonardo DiCaprio's eye level.

Click Here
Click Here
NotImpressed said on 21/Jul/17
There's a vidoe with Tom Cruise standing on stage with The Church of Scientology leader David Miscavige (who is 5'2"). Tom is barely taller than him. I would say he's 5'6" at best.
Slim 182 cm said on 21/Jul/17
Outsiders promo pic: Click Here
Pierre said on 21/Jul/17
@Rising=That's what i say =Tom's shoes are supposed 2 cm shoes,no one know the real advantage in this shoes.Big Jay is 171/172 and Tom is max the same height as him in shoes that no one know the real advantage and it was in a event.So i guess Tom is probably under 5"7'
Slim 182 cm said on 21/Jul/17
For me, it is impossible he measured below 170 peak. Just a strong 5'7. Yet alone 1.5 cm shorter than Rob is also impossible, he can only pull of 172 with certain camera angles. After rechecking the farrel cruise picture, there's more 6.5-7 cm between them, that would make farrel, 178.5-179 or tom 171 or 171.5.
Vam said on 20/Jul/17
Yes, 172cm.
Rising - 174 cm said on 20/Jul/17
As for Farrell, Slim. Actually, I'm pretty sure he's 5'9.5" so 176.5 cm, but he wears big heels a fair amount and has been caught tip-toeing at least twice at events next to women in heels, so he's going to look taller at times, but then can also look closer to 5'9" at other times.

I'm not 100% sure about Val Kilmer, though. I wouldn't go under 5'11" for him, nor over 5'11.5", but he's a big boot guy himself, whether cowboy boots or some other thick boot so naturally, he'll also look taller than he is at times.
Pierre said on 20/Jul/17
@Johan=We know Jeremy Renner is 5"8' only in the picture with Rob...It was an event he had maybe big lifts this day,he was a little on Rob with his left hand and was maybe a little on tiptoe for the picture.
Editor Rob
Renner isn't a guy who looked to go on tip-toes (Milo Ventimiglia is such a guy). I feel the photo is very very close to how he seemed in person.
Rising - 174 cm said on 20/Jul/17
Pierre said on 20/Jul/17
@Rising=so Tom would be supposed 170/171 in supposed 2 cm shoes in a event.Then i guess he's under 5"7'.

No. Jay said Tom looked like a 170-171 man wearing normal(2 cm) shoes. NOT that he'd actually measure that in 2 cm shoes. Jay himself is 172 barefoot and he was comparing Tom to himself.

As for Top Gun, Tom, like Sly Stallone, doesn't only seem to wear lifts built in, but sometimes puts lifts in mass produced shoes. Here are some examples: Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here

I don't know if this was the case for Top Gun or not, but if they were doing as many tricks as McGillis has claimed then I wouldn't rule it out.

@Slim: I didn't say he definitely wore lifts in the film, but I said it wouldn't surprise me considering it's claimed they tried to make him look taller and it's easy to conceal a lift in a thick boot.
Slim 182 cm said on 20/Jul/17
If rising is correct, than 10.5-11 cm between Kilmer and tom.
even said on 20/Jul/17
Tom Cruise is a 5 foot 7 man , trust me .
Jeff said on 20/Jul/17
Rob, is he wearing lifts there? Click Here
Editor Rob
doesn't look anything suspicious, just a military style boot.
Pierre said on 20/Jul/17
Dustin hoffman 5"5' is just an estimation like others estimations for others celebrities(Colin Farrell Tom cruise...).And lots of time estimations of height are more or less above the real heights.
Parker said on 20/Jul/17
If Katie is 5'9 Tom does well to look taller if he is only 5'7.
Click Here

Click Here
Pierre said on 20/Jul/17
@Rising=so Tom would be supposed 170/171 in supposed 2 cm shoes in a event.Then i guess he's under 5"7'.
Johan said on 20/Jul/17
Click Here

Under 5'7" ? come on, we know now that Jeremy is a solid 5'8" so even with a little boost I just don't see it.

Click Here
Slim 182 cm said on 20/Jul/17
Rising, I couldn't understand tom walking around with more than 2-2.5 inches of foot wear. But 5'7.25-5 is close to the truth. He looked it next to Hoffman in rainman, because for once he wasn't the shorter castmember, and in that minority report face to face scene with farrel, we both agree on 177 for Farrell right? That would make tom 6 cm shorter, so 171.
Also in the photo above next to Holmes, let's say Holmes is 5'9 barefoot, 6'0 in shoes. Tom seems to be pushing 175 in boots that would make you 5,10 if u wore them, I think he's wearing boots as you can see them sticking at the side of his trouser leg when he slouches/drops posture. Now back to top gun. If he did stuff a lift into his shoe.
bodyshot of Crowe and cruise: Click Here

In person, I do see short guys(under 5,8) wearing heaps of cowboys, boots, and timbalands. Specifically boots, if you want, google "RM Williams". Crazy heels man, it'd be the equivalent of walking on stilts, man.
Rising - 174 cm said on 19/Jul/17
@Pierre: He did say Tom looked more 170-171 without lifts, but he also said Tom could be at best his height, though he thought Tom was a bit shorter. I stand by 171.5, but 171 is entirely possible. 170 is just a bit low for me to believe.

@ Slim: His boots are pretty thick, wouldn't surprise me if he had lifts since Kelly McGillis spoke about the tricks they did to make him her height. She slouched and war barefoot in some scenes: Click Here Click Here
Pierre said on 19/Jul/17
@Rising= Tom in 2 cm shoes is only that he can see.Internal heels are not really visible.And that was in a event.In your memory he say Tom was at best his height= so very probably more 170/171 than 171/172.
Slim 182 cm said on 19/Jul/17
During "top gun" the height difference and shoe advantage, 3,5 inches between Kilmer and tom, but tom wore 0,5 inch more shoe making val a weak six footer, or tom 5'7.5
Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Jul/17
@ Pierre: That's not true. Here are BigJay's words on the first night:

"On the first night of the Premiere when I met him he was wearing normal shoes (2 cm formal shoes). Normal looking shoes. But that night I was also wearing 2 cm formal shoes just to be prepared. We both had on even shoes, and he appeared to look 170-171 cm to me. He just just fraction shorter than me."

Now the second day and Jay's impression of Tom's height:

"The net day i went to see him at World Square in the city and he out of nowhere had a growth spurt overnight and was 3-4 cm taller than he was the previous night! I thought it was safe to wear flats that day, but the day i wore flats he was wearing 3-4 cm lifts shoes! i am 171-172 cm tall. I came to a decision that Tom Cruise was definitely under 5'8, but he wasn't under 5'7. He would be 170-171 cm. That's my guess. He was not taller than me. He was at best my height and no taller!"

So there you have it. BigJay thought he was a solid 5'7" and not less than 5'7". When he did have lifts, we can conclude based on Tom appearing 3-4 cm taller than when he had appeared 170-171 that he looked between 173-175 the next day. That's also basically what Rob said Jay told him:

"Editor Rob: yes there were a few photos of them, Jay may have told you already, but I'll mention it here - he thought he was near 170cm one day then nearer 175 the next...of course he had a possible elevator shoe!"

Jay seemed to think he had 5-6 cm elevators when he appeared taller and I would agree with about 5 cm: Click Here Click Here Click Here

If Tom appeared 174 or so the next day then that would mean he was likely around 176-176.5 in 5 cm type elevators, which points to 171-171.5 or a fraction shorter than BigJay as h thought. As Rob said, this seems to confirm somewhere in the 5'7" range. I remember Tom measuring up pretty well to Colin in that movie, though I agree Colin is 5'9.5".
Pierre said on 18/Jul/17
@Rising=Big Jay was next to Tom in an event(Events are the good times for celebrities to wear lifts because lots of people) =in my memory Big Jay said Tom was a little shorter than him so a little under 171/172 range in very probably advantageous shoes=Probabilities Tom is under 5"7'=99.9% imo
Slim 182 cm said on 18/Jul/17
170, 171 maximum. 172 is a stretch. In rain man respectively, he failed to tower Dustin Hoffman, who's 165-168 last time I checked. And in minority report, he and imo 5'9.5 Farrell had a decent face to face scene, Click Here . So I do think you generously rounded up the quarter inch tbh. Never seen him 172 and above, unless wearing boots, I think he may have In too gun to not look short next to Kilmer.
Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Jul/17
I forgot that another example of Cruise looking short long before any height loss could account for it is the beginning of Collateral where Jason Statham looks about 3 cm taller than Cruise, which would make Tom about 5'7.5" if Statham is the 5'8.75" he's listed at here and it's just as likely Statham is only 174 cm, though the difference could obviously be an inch as well, but either way, Cruise definitely looked 171 cm minimum and 172 max with Statham. Tom must have forgotten his lifts for that role! Here's a close up of Tom's shoes: Click Here I actually don't think he did wear lifts, but that heel looks around a decent 3 cm to me, but credit to Tom for pulling off a more menacing role, especially at his natural height!
Sam said on 17/Jul/17
I think you get a smaller measurement if just above the eyebrows, well for me anyway, but the widest part for me is 23.5 inches and 23.25 inches just above the eyebrows. I used to think my head was on the bigger side and think it still is slightly, but not massive. Seems to suit me when I get a buzzcut. My head lengths about the same as Robs. My Grandad has a bigger head than me and makes mine look small in photos, but he's tall and long limbed and I think the men and some women on my mums side of the family have bigger heads in comparison to my Dads side.
actionjackson said on 17/Jul/17
23 inch for jenny seems impossible (average men head size is 22.5 inch),but thanks for your reply
Editor Rob
it's not impossible, I measured it at 23, mine was only a fraction more...
Hijopotamus said on 17/Jul/17
5'7" max
End of the discussion.
Thank you Michael Voorhees
Michael Voorhees said on 16/Jul/17
Somewhere here in the U.S., a few years ago a magazine put out a picture of a old bus pass I.D. card of Tom Cruise at the age of 18 & he was listed at 145lbs & 5'7', with or without shoes I don't know. But why at the age of 18 when he was still a unknown would he list himself at 0nly 5'7' in less it was the truth? It's possible that he grew a bit after the age of 18, but not by much.
actionjackson said on 16/Jul/17
hi Rob,could you please tell me your head circumference please?thanks
Editor Rob
I think last time it was 23.25 and Jenny about 23 flat
RisingForce said on 14/Jul/17
A 1/4" loss is obviously possible, but I see no real evidence of it and it'd be hard enough to detect on anyone, much less someone like Tom whose height has fluctuated a lot over the years. I don't think he looked shorter than he should have with Crowe, here's video of the Sydney premiere: Click Here

Look at Tom's boots back at the Mission Impossible 2 UK premiere with Crowe: Click Here Click Here He could get more height out of a thick boot like that if he put lifts in them compared to the maybe 1.8"-2" type elevators he wore at one of the recent Mummy events.

What Tom was doing around the time of Mission Impossible 2 was putting lifts in contemporary styles of chunky footwear: Click Here Click Here Or in the case of that first pic, even tip-toeing as well! Yet he still comes up shorter than Nicole Kidman in flats. Or a few years earlier, he'd wear logger type boots: Click Here But Tom almost always wore thick boots with Nicole, undoubtedly with lifts at times. Similarly, late 2000s/early 2010s, Tom was wearing bigger boots a lot. Look at the "Knight and Day" Tokyo premiere or Jerry Bruckheimer's Walk of Fame ceremony. It's likely he was getting 2.3"-2.5" from those boots with lifts, but I haven't seen him wear those in a while. Lately, he seems to favor 1.8"-2" type elevator shoes.

Here's an old photo from a different event, doesn't look like there'd be much less of a difference than there is now: Click Here

In a lot of the photos, one or the other is closer to the camera, but Russell is 5'10.5" and Tom was, and I'm pretty sure still is, 5'7.5". A 3" difference is noticeable, I don't think there's any more than that recently. Recently is far from the shortest Tom has looked, imo. He looked shorter early in his career when he was still playing teen roles and look at this 80s photo with an aged Frank Sinatra: Click Here Sinatra was never more than 5'7.5" himself and I think the same is probably true for Cruise. Tom with a roughly 5'9" Robert Duvall back then: Click Here Even with Tom employing the old arm around the shoulder, Duvall looks 1.5"-2" taller.

Then there's Tom with 5'7.5" Steven Spielberg 15 years ago: Click Here If you didn't consider Tom was dropping a fraction height with his stance, you'd think he was a flat 5'7" there. Scroll down and you'll see the photo of Tom shorter than 171 cm Jerry Bruckheimer on the set of Days of Thunder as well. I don't think Tom looks shorter these days than he ever did before. I think the bulk of his short appearances were relatively early in his career, but he can look shorter then taller, then shorter etc. depending on his footwear. I think from seeing him with so many people listed 5'7.25"-5'7.5" on this site(Spielberg, Bruckheimer, Sinatra, Lewis Hamilton), Tom has always been that height, but could and still can look as tall as 5'8.5", perhaps 5'9" with lifts and his good posture.

@Darius: I agree.
Darius said on 13/Jul/17
I think if any chance for a height loss, then it would be most probably 5'7.5" peak and 5'7.25" now. I don't think he was 172 cm. That's bit of a stretch. Maybe 171 cm flat now. He looks tall to be 5'7" and too short to be 5'8". So I think 171.5 or 5'7.5" is the most reasonable like many here agrees.
Brad said on 12/Jul/17
"Investigated the possibility of a 1/4" loss". Sherlock Holmes hat and pipe looking at all the '17 photo evidence for that 1/4". 5 and 7 plus 3/4 is the lowest I'd go and he's been around that forever.
Peter175 said on 12/Jul/17
Rob, have you investigated the possibility of a 1/4 loss? Look at him with Russel Crowe in the 90s and compare it to now and Tom looks shorter compared to him. bigjay at 172 seemed to edge him too. To be honest I haven't seen Tom cruise look 5'8 like he did in Vanilla Sky or The Firm the past years. He looks more and more a 5'7 range guy and not a strong one. Even in Jack Reacher he didn't seem anything about 171. Same with him and weak 5'8 Zac Efron

I'm beginning to think he's 172 peak and 171 right now.
Editor Rob
I haven't ruled out the possibility, especially last couple of years...
Darius said on 11/Jul/17
I would say 5'7.25 i.e. 171 cm. Looked shorter than Big Jay who claims 171-172. And Jay also said that Tom had thicker shoes. I think he is min about 5'7" to a max. 5'7.5" barefoot. But he sometimes does strike me as a 5'8" guy when with Renner maybe it is because of his hidden shoe lifts than will add up to 0.75" invisibly. Jeremy Renner Is 5'8.25" in my opinion. Cruise chooses his footwear wisely hence why it seems so inconspicuous while adds decent height and therefore it is not so obvious as Downey's sneakers.
Peter175 said on 10/Jul/17
Defo isn't far off going by his proportions.

The guy next to his is about 5'9 and Tom looks maybe an inch off. He has a pretty decent frame size
Click Here

He has exceptionally good posture and often has thicker footware and can appear 5'9 at times. But yeah he's defo 171-172
RisingForce said on 10/Jul/17
I'd give Renner 5'8.25" and Cruise 5'7.5". There is still a real chance of the weak 5'8" considering how tall he often looks, but seeing him with 5'7.25"-5'7.5" guys, I'd guess 5'7.5" before it. There's also a real chance of just 5'7.25", especially if Lewis Hamilton's measurement around that was accurate. Renner pretty much has to be 5'8.25" or 5'8.5", he's much easier to pin down than Cruise. Even a flat 5'7" and a full 5'8" can't be completely ruled out for Tom, but most evidence doesn't quite point to either.
Pierre said on 10/Jul/17
@RisingForce= do you know how elevator shoes which look like Tom's or Jeremy's shoes can give you? Look at in the web it's very easy to find this type of shoes.Just enter"elevator shoes"=not just a fraction more than sneakers.You can gain easily 2.5 inches with this type of shoes and sometimes more.
RisingForce said on 9/Jul/17
I agree there seems a chance there, Rob, but I'm not sure. There was a stretch where Tom seemed to appear often in normal shoes. Renner definitely doesn't have lifts, though. Pierre, Foxx could look 1.5" taller, although maybe not more than 3 cm. It depends on their posture, but there is of course a chance Tom put an extra lift in those boots. Without lifts, I think any difference between those boots and sneakers would only be a fraction.
Richard said on 9/Jul/17
Hey Rob, from what I see from the photos of RisingForce I would say that Cruise is between 5'7 "-5'7.75".
Renner is:
174 cm - 12 a.m.
173/173,5 cm - 06:30/08:30 p.m. (lowest daily height)
Classic dress shoes have 2 cm heels so at Premiere Renner could be 175-175,5 cm.
172 cm - 12 a.m.
170/171 cm - 06:30/08:30 p.m. (lowest daily height)
His dress shoes seems to have a slightly high heels so 2,5-3 cm plus a possibile 1,5-2 cm elevators.
So based on this we have:
Renner 175/175,5 cm (173/173,5+2 heels)
Cruise 174,5 cm (170+3 heels+1,5 elevators).
What do you think?
Editor Rob
barefoot I still would say Renner has a chance at over half, but maybe not a full inch on Tom.
Pierre said on 9/Jul/17
@RisinfForce=Tom and Jeremy Renner=imo Jeremy is more than 1 inch taller than Tom here,he's slouching more than Tom lot's of time imo.I don't know if Jeremy had advantageous shoes(likely because it was an event).Tom's shoes don't look classic shoes (the picture number 2 when he walk).In the picture Jeremy Renner /Rob,Jeremy could have advantageous shoes(it was an event and his shoes could have internal heels)
Pierre said on 9/Jul/17
@RisinfForce=Excuse me in my comment of 8/Jul/17 i want to say JAMIE FOXX is 1.5 inches taller than Tom,not Lewis Hamilton.
Pierre said on 8/Jul/17
@Rising Force=imo Lewis Hamilton is around 1.5 inches taller than Tom at the peak of their heads(Lewis has a bigger head) and Tom seem to have generous shoes with big external heels and his shoes are looking very vertical(then probability of internal heels)
RisingForce said on 8/Jul/17
Good footage of Tom and 5'8.25"-5'8.5" Jeremy Renner at Mission Impossible 5 premiere: Click Here Tom is just slightly shorter. He looks a weak 5'8" or 172-173 range as opposed to Renner's 173-174 range. Now whether Tom had lifts is the question. Tom's shoes: Click Here Click Here And Renner definitely didn't have lifts: Click Here Tom's shoes may well be normal too, but they're not quite as flat as Renner's. If Tom had lifts or elevators then they'd be the 1.8"-2" kind, no more.
Editor Rob
a chance Tom could have had a custom shoe there, I'd say he has worn footwear at times that was perfectly normal, then other times it seems like an elevator shoe.

But then, I've seen boots in shops that would be mistaken for an elevator style too!
RisingForce said on 7/Jul/17
Yeah, I can't see Tom 1 cm taller than Lewis Hamilton. Here's video of Tom and 5'9" Jamie Foxx at the 2004 MTV Movie Awards: Click Here Tom had boots while Foxx had sneakers, as you can see in this pic: Click Here I don't know what the footwear differences would be, or if Tom is concealing lifts in those boots. Interestingly, there are also photos of Tom and Vin Diesel that day.
Darius said on 7/Jul/17
@RisingForce Intersting post. Can't agree more. I reckon he is 171 cm flat. Maybe even 5'7.25". But I think at worst he will be around 170.5 or something like that. But I am not quite sure he will 170 cm or 5'7" flat. By saying that i think that Lewis Hamilton is also like 171 flat maybe few mm above or below. Tbh I think if anything Hamilton is likely to be taller than Cruise. Btw, He gives a tall impression in his movies. When I saw the Mission impossible series I thought he was around 5'10". He looks tall for a 5'7" range guy. He does a good job in appearing taller in an inconspicuous way than Downey.
HonestSlovene said on 7/Jul/17
@RisingForce I 100% agree, exactly what I think about Tom Cruise regarding height as well.
Marquis said on 6/Jul/17
And, in other news.... Tom Cruise is still 5'7".
Original said on 5/Jul/17
with lifts he looks 5'8.5" without lifts probably somewhere between 5'7" and 5'7.5", OK so 5'7.25" makes all sense even if I feel that he is flat 5'7.
Bert91 said on 4/Jul/17
That is only if you consider men and women that are within the 18-30 years age rank. Take also into account that if you measure them around 30 years from now, the average height is gonna be closer to 5'9 for men and to 5'4 for women, due to height loss. That's kind of the same that happens with elder people now: perhaps many of them were an inch (or a bit more) taller in their youth.
Hijopotamus said on 4/Jul/17
Robby, Tom is short and everyone knows it. Same with Prince, who wore high heels. No problem. These guys don't trick anyone and they never pretend they were taller. Its about image. Other celebrities like Brad Pitt are the ones that try to trick their fans. We have seen Tom barefoot in Risky Business.
RisingForce said on 4/Jul/17
I agree with Robby, I still guess Cruise is between 171 and 172 at 5'7.5", but the one thing I may change my mind on is that he's looking more 171 than 172 without his lifts.

Not a full pic, but Cruise looking shorter than 171 cm Jerry Bruckheimer on the Days of Thunder set: Click Here Now 23 years later, Cruise with boots and lifts looks somewhere from 1"-1.5" taller: Click Here Click Here You can see from the angle of Tom's foot and Tom's knees being noticeably higher than Depp's in 1.7" cowboy boots, Tom probably gets 2.3"-2.5" from boots and lifts: Click Here

And if Lewis Hamilton was measured accurately at 171 then it's really tough for me to see Tom 1 cm taller: Click Here Hamilton may have had ground advantage, but remove the tilt and I still don't think Tom would be taller and while Hamilton had 0.7" type shoes, Tom even had boots: Click Here Then side by side on set: Click Here Tom doesn't look any taller there to me either. Not much, if any shorter, but not taller either.

We've seen Tom pretty much identical in height to 5'7.5" Spielberg, sometimes looking taller and sometimes look shorter, so it really seems to me Tom is somewhere in the 5'7.25"-5'7.5" range like the other 3. He still looks too tall to be a flat 5'7" to me, but I wouldn't guess him closer to 5'8" than 5'7" anymore.
Robby said on 4/Jul/17
but he really looks more 171 cm than 172, Rob.
Robby said on 4/Jul/17
He is definitely obsessed in a heightwise manner
Peter175 said on 3/Jul/17
Found these on Tom's Twitter. It's insane how he only posts pics where he's in a height favorable position.

Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

Anyway it's his birthday today and mine as well :'). Happy 55th Mr Cruise, you've given me much joy for your unforgettable performances. Also happy 22nd birthday to myself XD

What do you think about the picture with Corden? (We've already decided that Tom was half inch shorter but still interesting photo!)
Editor Rob
yeah, Tom won't be approving photos were he looks short for his feed.

Lots of actors have a say in maintaining or enhancing their image, whether it's approving every single use of their image in magazines, promotions to do with movies or posters etc...
mande2013 said on 3/Jul/17
@Sparky The average actually is a solid 5'10 if we limit it to white non-Hispanic American males, and a hair under 5'5 for white non-Hispanic American woman, so 5'4.9 or something of that nature.
even said on 2/Jul/17
hes five foot seven stop worrying
MJKoP said on 29/Jun/17
@msj Absolutely not. That would be a horrible thing for me to say, and very hypocritical at barely 5'7" myself. I meant that many male fashion models who work for actual agencies are between 6'2"-6'4", with a preferred and often even REQUIRED height of being nothing under six foot. Cruise has a unique handsomeness that is often seen only in that field due to the imposed restrictions for the sake of perpetuating an 'ideal male image'. I think it's pretty silly and quite possibly even downright offensive, but that's essentially the way in which that shallow industry works. And it also helps lead to the warped perception of Cruise's alleged (lack of)stature. It's obviously just going by loose stereotypes, which of course is never right, but so many people get suckered right in and buy into it.
Headman said on 29/Jun/17
What would you say his head length is, Rob?
Editor Rob
Headman, in the photograph of Tom with our former contributor Glenn, it seemed Tom had a bigger head, I think it has to be over 9 inches at least. Glenn's head wasn't small, well for his height it wasn't.
Sparky said on 28/Jun/17
The Internet is the greatest source of disinformation ever created. Per the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention (a source for American height information does not get any more authoritative than the CDC), the average American man is 5'9.2" tall when measured in bare feet. I wish people would stop rounding this figure up to 5'10". The 5'10" number has been propagated erroneously so many times on the Internet that people are beginning to believe that it is fact when it is fiction. An American man who is 5'9" when measured in bare feet is for all intents and purposes average height. An American man who is 5'10" when measured in bare feet is above average height. An American man who is 181cm (5'11.25") when measured in bare feet for all intents and purposes at the short end of tall, as that measurement is 2" from the mean. It is also the 76th percentile, which means that only one in four American men reach or exceed 181cm.

Click Here
msj said on 28/Jun/17
MJKoP said on 26/Jun/17
The guy who said his female coworker thought Cruise was 'at least 6'1' is really not surprising at all. Someone who had no clue who Cruise was and saw his movies could easily deduct that he's of an above average height. As is, he's barely under average, so lifts, camera angles, downsized props/sets, and casting shorter supporting roles and extras can easily give an illusion of a very tall man, even at Cruise's size. On top of that, he has the face and hair of a 6'3" male model, and a personality that projects as quite the strapping bloke. Nobody in their right mind would see Cruise on-screen and objectively come the conclusion that he's 5'6" or under. It's the tabloids and gossip columns that did such a thing to so many impressionable minds. They watch his movies and see what they THINK they should be seeing...NOT what they are ACTUALLY seeing!

what do you mean he has the face and hair of a 6'3 male model?
makes no sense
are you saying short guys can't be good looking?
Parker said on 28/Jun/17
@MJKoP Your so right. I was telling an extended family member recently that I had a work colleague who is the image of a young Tom Cruise. Her reply was 'is he very short?' -
MJKoP said on 26/Jun/17
The guy who said his female coworker thought Cruise was 'at least 6'1' is really not surprising at all. Someone who had no clue who Cruise was and saw his movies could easily deduct that he's of an above average height. As is, he's barely under average, so lifts, camera angles, downsized props/sets, and casting shorter supporting roles and extras can easily give an illusion of a very tall man, even at Cruise's size. On top of that, he has the face and hair of a 6'3" male model, and a personality that projects as quite the strapping bloke. Nobody in their right mind would see Cruise on-screen and objectively come the conclusion that he's 5'6" or under. It's the tabloids and gossip columns that did such a thing to so many impressionable minds. They watch his movies and see what they THINK they should be seeing...NOT what they are ACTUALLY seeing!
Slim 181 cm said on 26/Jun/17
5'6.75 - 5'7.25
RisingForce said on 24/Jun/17
I would say there's a better chance of 5'8" than 5'7", but 5'8" is a stretch, imo, I really think he's in between and in between 171 and 172 cm. As long as Steven Spielberg and Lewis Hamilton are thought to be 5'7.5", I won't give Cruise any taller and with Jerry Bruckheimer 171 cm, I think Cruise at virtually the same, but 0.5 cm taller makes sense. Jay meeting Cruise convinced me more of 5'7.5". Here's a screenshot of Cruise with 174-175 cm Statham at the beginning of Collateral: Click Here Btw, that was a great movie and one of Tom's best performances. But Statham looked at least an inch taller to me and considering Statham looked shorter than weak 5'9" Robert Knepper, I think Jason is about 5'8.5" or a weak 5'9" as Rob lists him.

Peter, I put lifts in cowboy boots a lot, as well as lifts in Cuban heel dress boots. I often wear a size to a size and a half too big, which makes it easy to fit a 1" lift, but 1.5 sizes too big is the absolute minimum needed for a 2" lift. As for sneakers, I sometimes put lifts in Converse high tops because nobody will think twice of those shoes. It looks like you have a footwear disadvantage, yet you can easily match a thicker sneaker inconspicuously.
Peter175 said on 23/Jun/17
Parker, there's certainly a chance of Tom being 5'8 but given the footwear he's consistently donned and with reflection of that I can understand a 5'7.25 argument for the guy. 5'7 flat, a lot harder to believe but imo he's either 5'7 or 5'8, not below or above.

He always will get 5'7.5 from me and I've seen nearly all of his movies. Rob even says he's closer to 5'7.5 than 5'8" so I don't think anyone will think so. Look at him with Kanye west, not a whole lot above 5'7 or Efron. 172 is probably Tom's "good day" height with 5'7.5 being his "bad day' height.

Anyway he's below average but certainly doesn't deserve to be called short
Parker said on 23/Jun/17
S.J.H said on 21/Jun/17
@Parker said on 16/Jun/17

Can't see them barefoot. Lol.

Read my post. You would need to watch the film to catch that scene, its not in the Utube clip I posted. He's a minimum half a head taller (4.5 inches). Unless Rob has the height of every celebrity Tom has ever stood next to incorrect, its impossible for Tom to be under 5'7. He's clearly not the 5'9 he once claimed, but closer to 5'8 than 5'7 IMO.
Peter175 said on 22/Jun/17
Rising, to be fair I think Tom being short is often overplayed. Most people I know assume he's average or close to it, and one click google will tell them he's 5'7" and they'll just accept that. I think we're overrating how short people perceive him, it's a running gag as all most people will accept he's a normal male height of at least 5ft6 inches

Also what kind of sneakers do you use with your lifts and having many cms? I find cowboy boots are ideal for style if you're going out, but regular day it's an regular Yeezy's or converse with 2 cm
Jacob said on 21/Jun/17
One of the girls he dated was 175 cms so they where 3 cms apart so I don't think he's a drastically below average man chances are he could of been 5'8" who knows when he was younger rob would know this coming from a 5'8 or 5'8 and quarter or 5'8" and half on a good day lol
Darius said on 21/Jun/17
From what i have seen Tom Cruise is 5'7.5" max barefoot.But a min 5'7".I personally think he is a 171 cm person. But a great and hardworking actor I must say.
I am one if his greatest fans especially for his work in the mission impossible series.
S.J.H said on 21/Jun/17
@Parker said on 16/Jun/17

Can't see them barefoot. Lol. Tom is never 172cm and 5'7 always and probably 5'6.75 now
Morris said on 20/Jun/17
@bigjay007 it seems that Cruise wears rises into his shoes observing the photos you posted. If the rises are into the shoes the heel is not realistic.
RisingForce said on 19/Jun/17
I agree, Peter, except, we have to exclude people who have been brainwashed by the media. Sometimes, once someone gets an idea in their head, it will influence anything they see. The fact that Tom has had 3 wives taller than him, or much taller in Nicole's case, has helped fuel this perception. For instance, if you look at the photo above with Katie, Tom looks 8 cm shorter than Katie in heels. Katie could be 183 cm in heels, so that would make Tom 175 in those shoes, which have a decent heel, but I don't think are elevators. Of course, Katie could be 174 cm barefoot or have less than 3" heels, which would make her more 181-182 range, but even so, you have Cruise between 5'8"-5'9" in normal shoes. People probably don't even stop to think about this and use logic. They just see Tom noticeably shorter than women time and again and don't consider that it's more that Tom is with tall women, who are also wearing heels. And while Tom wears lifts or elevators a lot, Tom, like everyone except maybe Vin Diesel and Burt Reynolds, doesn't ALWAYS wear lifts, but if people explain away everything with lifts, without even looking to see if there's any sign of them, then you can make a 5'6" max Cruise fit. I see thwe same thing on the Sly Stallone page.
Peter175 said on 16/Jun/17
I don't think anyone who's watched more than 2 Tom Cruise movies thinks he's below 5'6. I bet most people beg him at 5'7 or 8 just like this site. Cruise has a tall stage presence but looks shorter at events
World Citizen said on 16/Jun/17
Hey Rob how tall do you think his stepson Connor Cruise is? Looks not taller than Tom cruise to me.
Editor Rob
looks like he'd be close in height to Tom.
Slim 181 cm said on 16/Jun/17
I know this will get replied to with "evidence" or something like that but here goes nothing.
Pitt: 181 to 180
Cruise: 170 to 171
C'mon you don't wear lifts unless someone is 3-5 inches bigger than you(as brad is compared to Tom)
Parker said on 16/Jun/17
Click Here

The comments under these Utube clips always make me smile Here's a brief clip from Cocktail with Cruise dancing and looking a good 4-6 inches taller than 5'3 listed Elizabeth Shue, and somebody has written 'Shue must be 4foot for Cruise to be taller.' I realise its a joke, but its still media brainwashing that makes people put such comments.

And for those about to shout lifts/boxes etc go and watch the film. He is 4-5 inches taller than Shue in a barefoot beach shot.
MJKoP said on 15/Jun/17
Slim 181 cm said on 15/Jun/17
Check out tom before jaw/chin implants:

I'm surprised that nobody has yet accused him of getting one of those height-increasing silicone skull implants(yes, they DO exist!)
Arch Stanton said on 15/Jun/17
Yes, we underestimate just how much surgery/cosmetic work these good looking celebs have had.
Slim 181 cm said on 15/Jun/17
Check out tom before jaw/chin implants:
Click Here
Click Here
World Citizen said on 13/Jun/17
I asked an acquaintance of me how tall she thought Tom Cruise was, she guessed at least 6 ft 1.

Anyway Rob I think you have to downgrade Tom Cruise to 5 ft 7.25, because Jay met him and said he was shorter by a fraction.
Mofo said on 12/Jun/17

If you are worried about anonymity just blur your face out or just ask Robby Rob to block out your face when you send it to him.
It will be really good if you could verify your height also by taking a pic on a stadiometer that way we will have both a barefoot pic of Tom (rare!) and can accurately gauge his height by knowing yours!
(That is if you're not lying...)
Trueheight said on 12/Jun/17
People still believe he's 5'7 or 5'8, no way
Johnson said on 11/Jun/17
@John from Ochorios... post the picture with Tom Cruise...

I do not know why but all these people saying they have pictures with celebrities never post pics to prove. Not even blurring faces
Anthony said on 11/Jun/17
John soo why not post the picture?
RisingForce said on 11/Jun/17
Good find, Rob. Those talk shows as well as shots courtside at basketball games are among the best opportunities to see if someone wears lifts or not with the less frequent shot of someone sitting at a premiere, like Tom at the Venice Film Festival in 1999. Seems Tom has worn those 2 inch type elevator shoes or 1 inch lifts in shoes quite a bit.

Agreed, Peter. I've said that with Tom a million times. His big mistake is wearing pants too short and too tight on top of that. Even when he goes with a boot for a bigger 2.3"-2.5" gain, he doesn't adjust his pants length, fit or cut. The Bruckheimer Walk of Fame Star ceremony is probably the best example of that in addition to the Knight and Day Tokyo premiere to an extent.

Interestingly, Tom in the late 90s with Nicole seemed to like to pick out chunkier shoes of the day and use an insert lift with those. I've also seen Tom try a logger type boot both back with Nicole and more recently with Katie for an extra boost and he wore cowboy boots quite a bit up until the mid 90s. He'll wear motorcycle boots at times as well, I believe sometimes with an extra lift. But one thing I don't remember seeing proof of Tom doing that most other big lift wearers do is put lifts in sneakers.

As for my lifts, I've put a 1" lift in Converse high tops too, Peter. It's good for the reason you mentioned. Mostly what I've done is put 1" or 2" lifts in cowboy boots and sometimes even with 2" Cuban heel boots. It's a bit over the top perhaps, but it was sort of a progression. The people who seemed to notice were people who knew about how tall I really am. I did think that people may expect a big heel like either of those boots to make me taller so most won't suspect I have even more inside. Of course, neither of us really have anything to explain. It's perfectly normal for men in our height range to want to be taller. People do all sorts of things to look the way they want to, this is no different. Whether it's hair, clothes, sun glasses or anything else. We're hardly the only ones doing this too. Otherwise, lifts and elevator shoes wouldn't be advertised.
lol93 said on 11/Jun/17
Zac looks clearly taller than Tom by 2 cm easily and Zac is not a strong 5'8
Peter175 said on 11/Jun/17
Oh btw, for those looking to get shoelifts, I have a good pair from Dons, but I wouldn't recommend them for beginners. I'd start with converse + 2 Dr sholls and work up to a full inch liftkit, then experiment with using them in boots and higher sneakers until you can get a good feel for them. Then try 1.25-5 size. These are pretty much the most you can get from an insole.

I'd recommend Don's for hardcore lift enthusiasts who happen to have taller girlfriends like I do :') (She's 174) it does miracle for when we're taking photos or out somewhere classy.

I have the cowboy boot style that is advertised at near 4 inches, but I don't think it's quite that much, around 3.5. But still, I'm comfortably above 6ft in them so I walk around like a 5'11.25-5 guy

I know height doesnt matter and she knows I wear them and we don't have a problem, but I like looking taller and she likes me looking taller, but I have no problem if she wants to wear heels and I'm just in my converse, at which point she'll be about an inch to 2 taller than me. I don't fraud my height either, I have no problem with my height and don't deny using lifts. It's just a preference that I like to stand taller and I think a lot of men feel the same way. We need to break this stigma!
Peter175 said on 11/Jun/17
Tom, protip from a guy who wears lifts, always wear low cut pants to cover your ankles.

He's smart in wearing a small heel with a lift inside tho. I do the same with my converse, it makes it look like you aren't getting any extra height from your shoes but you are still taller.

Small heels + insole is the best way to wear shoelifts. If you do the weeknd/bono large blunky heels its obvious and even if it gets you more height, the style just isn't good most of the time. I'd either go cowboy boot with a small lift for 3.2 inch gain if I'm feeling daring or converse with 1 inch lift for 1.8 inch gain, that's my main go to lift for everyday situations. It makes me feel from low average to solidly average or maybe a slice above average
Morningheight 181.5cm said on 10/Jun/17
He seems to be my sisters height 173cm...
John said on 10/Jun/17
I was vacationing in Ocho Rios with my wife and we happen to run into Tom. I was quite surprised and as you can imagine my wife was absolutely delighted. We were on the beach barefoot and I am 5 10 and a half and I was quite surprised at how much shorter time was than me. We managed to snap a picture with my wife and after carefully looking at it on my PC I feel like Tom is just a little over five seven perhaps 5-7 in 1/4. However he may have been slouching and I was standing as tall as possible for the photo. Very nice guy we finished a pina colada with him and then went about our Separate Ways.
delancey said on 10/Jun/17
@Slim181 Actually, average height in Australia according to the Bureau of Statistics is 5'9 for the general male population as a whole and 5'10 for males aged 18 to 24 (links below).
5'7 is where short begins imo but it's not stand out from the crowd short or anything.

Link: Click Here
Link: Click Here
World Citizen said on 9/Jun/17
Rob one day I look forward to see a picture of you with Tom Cruise together.
Slim 181 cm said on 9/Jun/17
HonestSlovene, here in Australia(and USA) the average mans height is 5'8.5" (174 cm ) so I would place 170-173 at the average/below average range.
Parker said on 9/Jun/17
Click Here

Will be interesting to see peoples views on the UK James Corden show with Cruise last night. All about opinions, but if anything I thought Tom looked taller than James, but admittedly may have had a slight footwear advantage. Very little between them IMO, and of course Rob only has 1cm between them....but has he got them the right way round?
HonestSlovene said on 8/Jun/17
5'7" is solid short range for a man in the west but hardly dwarf or anything like that. 5'4" you could argue of being upper dwarf range. 5'9.75"-5'10" is average or 50th percentile.
Mofo said on 7/Jun/17
Tavlaret ha ha but you have to agree Tom is a beautiful dwarf right? Has he lost height? Doubt it. He still looks in the 5ft7 range.
I have to say he is still very handsome to this day. And he still is a remarkable actor.

AzKat I agree!

I can't wait to see The Mummy it looks excellent.
Tavlaret said on 7/Jun/17
Action Movies by Tom Cruise: When dwarfs save the world. :-)
Darius said on 7/Jun/17
Rob, how much height difference is there in that photo of Cruise and Efron in Graham Norton Show? I think 0.5 to 0.75 inch.
Editor Rob
not that much.
AzKat said on 7/Jun/17
We l love Tom Cruise. He is gorgeous. We don't care how tall he is.

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.