
All James Bonds Are Six-Feet-Two
#1
Posted 12 April 2007 - 03:44 PM
For your amusement: "The James Bond Height Chart", from The Globe in April 1992 (you can find this on the Web) shows pictures of the first four Bonds...with Mel Gibson, then regarded as a leading contender for the role. The photos are set up so that the Bonds do appear to be shrinking and the title of the article was "The Incredible Shrinking Bond".
The heights given were as follows:
Connery: 6'3"
Lazenby: 6'2"
Moore: 6'1"
Dalton: 6'
(Gibson: 5'8")
Cool idea, but not so fast. As I research further, I find that the matter's more complex. Celebrity Heights raises the issue of when the actor is measured--and the Bonds should be measured in their Bond years, not their old age, when they've shrunk. Even so, the results are surprising.
Correct heights?
Connery: Heights given range from 6'1.25" to 6'2" (Not 6'3")
Lazenby: Current height is given as 6'. Peak height given as 6'2.5". Also reported as 6'2"
Moore: Current height is given as 6'. Claims to have been 6'2" in the seventies.
Dalton: Current height is given as 6'1.75". Listed as 6'" in IMDb.
Brosnan: Curent height is given as 6'1.25", or 6/1" in IMDb. Claims to be 6'2" ('on a good day', he says)
Going back to the beginning...In a photo of Dalton, Moore and Brosnan, Dalton is clearly the tallest and Brosnan appears to be even with the shrunken Moore. Photos of the elderly Sean and Moore show Sean to be taller by an inch or so.
Me, I agree with one poster who wrote: "Every Bond has been promoted at (sic) 6'2".
Anyone have any further facts on all of this?
#2
Posted 12 April 2007 - 03:46 PM
#3
Posted 12 April 2007 - 04:07 PM
Yes. Men in general lie about measurement in inches.
How strange. I was six-two this morning. In height.
#4
Posted 12 April 2007 - 05:00 PM
http://www.worldwide....com/metcal.htm
or 6.00394 ft tall so Dalton and Brosnan are closest to the character in terms of hieght.
If I had to guess, Lazenby looks the tallest on screen.Craig is obviouly the shortest but he is more agile and dynamic a physical specimen than his taller predecessors-he's got a more appropriate body for special forces/spying activities.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Hieght has nothing to do with combat aptitude or toughness. The main advantage is having a greater variety of women to pursue as it's a hard sell for a guy to go after a women taller than himself(unless you're Tom Cruise

#5
Posted 12 April 2007 - 05:12 PM
#6
Posted 12 April 2007 - 05:38 PM
I've seen alot of Bond fans say that chart with Mel Gibson is absolute nonsense.
[mra]I
#7
Posted 12 April 2007 - 05:55 PM
[color="#DDA0DD"][mra]I
#8
Posted 12 April 2007 - 06:18 PM
#9
Posted 12 April 2007 - 07:19 PM
Mel gibson is 5ft 6 accordin to himself on Parkinson.Also Brozza is Max 6 ft.The producers themselves said so after Goldeneye released.The earlier ones are the tall ones.Connery,Dalton and Moore seems a lil more tha 6ft
Thanks for the clarification. I've seen Mel's movies. I know what I saw. And yet he's said , at least, to have said: he's as tall as all the others. Right. Similarly, Brozza. I don't recall him towering over Stephanie Zimberlast.
#10
Posted 12 April 2007 - 07:21 PM

#11
Posted 12 April 2007 - 08:13 PM
Dodge, could this thread be more about issues with your own height than their heights?
Possibly, Santa. Possibly. I'm only 6'. I've always wanted to be 6'2"--even if only like Pierce 'on a good day'.