How tall is Robert Redford

Mick Wilson said on 1/May/23
I have to call BS here. I've stood next to (and talked to) Mr. Redford many many times, as he lived near me in Northern California for many years. I am 5' 10" and my wife is 5' 9", and Redford was at the very least 3" shorter than my wife. He is a very diminutive person, and I would estimate that he weighs less than 100 pounds. It's funny that the 'Optional Guess' here starts at 5'7" because he is absolutely definitely not even that tall. Trust me on that one!

Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 10/Feb/23
Strong 5ft10 at least. Edged Newman comfortably

Arch Stanton said on 19/Jan/23
Over 5 ft 10 seems a stretch at times for prime, Jane Fonda made him look struggling with 5'10 in Barefoot in the Park. See James, the girls were all in love with Robert and Paul Newman according to Sandy, they were blonde and blue eyed, not your black haired Italian stallion Instagram types!

The Batman 97808 said on 30/Jul/22
Peak: 5'10 1/2

Today: 5'8

MikeO said on 7/May/22
read this about how the starpower of Redford warps the laws of space, time and height, --- it's hilarious...and go on the low side---not everyone who says they saw him is lying...they said 5'6 - 5'9

Click Here

Ruth said on 2/Sep/21
He was always rumored to be short in LA, like 5’6” - 5’8”

I did hear 5’6” at one point.

5'10 Dude said on 21/Jul/21
I feel that the average guess for his peak height is too low. I can totally see him at about 5'10½ for his peak though it is rather silly that he claimed 5'11½.

Frank Col said on 12/May/21
If Redford did say he was 5ft 11.5 then despite being a fan of his, no comment better illustrates the complete BS that eminates from the mouth of actors. Redford at his peak never went above 5ft 9 without big heels or lifts. Never. Paul Newman was slightly taller at 5ft 9.5. I have sadly never met either but have met people who knew them both well who confirmed they were never any taller than I and have seen photos taken with them which confirms this.

ALEXIZ/180cm said on 6/Apr/21
Young 177
Today 174

peters said on 6/Feb/21
All I know is he was described as 5'8" in the newspapers in the 80s and the 90s.

Rising174cm said on 7/Jan/21
I'd have said more 5'10" flat than above. He was shorter than 5'10" Robert Shaw in a wide shot in The Sting and looked similar Newman in the same film. Newman wasn't much shorter than Robert Shaw himself making it doubtful Shaw is underlisted. He also looked a good 3" shorter than Sam Waterston in The Great Gatbsy. But if Louise Fletcher said he was taller than her then maybe he really was 5'10.25"-5'10.5" and claiming a shoe height with the 5'11.5". Incidentally, I think we can assume he really did claim it since there's two quotes 4 years apart.

More recently, he could look 5'8.5" max while promoting his last film with Danny Glover. He seemed to hold up well into his 60s, but his height loss became noticeable by 70 and perhaps more rapid the last 5-10 years.

Genau said on 12/Dec/20
is 5ft10.75 peak possible ?

Miss Sandy Cowell said on 18/Aug/20
🎁🎂🎈🎊 Happy Birthday Robert 🎈🎂🎁🎊

Congratulations to Golden Great Robert Redford, actor, director and father of four, who celebrates his 8️⃣4️⃣th Birthday today. Have a wonderful family day, Robert! XXX

When I was at school, the girls were either in love with Robert, Paul Newman - or both! I went more for rock stars...

5ft10.5 peak and 5ft9 today. 😁😉 The averages look a bit stinky to my way of thinking! 😷😝

🎁🎂🎈🎊🎁🎂🎈🎊🎁🎂🎈🎊🎁🎂🎈🎊

handsomebrady67 said on 18/Aug/20
Happy 84th birthday,Robbie !!!! (The late,great Roberto Clemente would have been 86 today.)
I thought Redford was ALWAYS five-nine,but I forgot that we shrink with age.For example,I was once five-nine,but come in at just under five-eight at age 67 .

Sinclair said on 18/Aug/20
Happy 84th birthday, Robert Redford. Redford’s peak height seems fairly straight forward without much controversy, I have no issues with 5’10.5”. Redford was taller than Paul Newman in both Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid and The Sting. In The Natural, I recall Redford may have had as much two inches on Robert Duvall! I think Robert Shaw gave a taller impression than Redford in The Sting, although, I suspect Shaw was wearing lifts to make his evil character seem even more threatening and dominating.

Gladstone Screwer said on 27/Mar/20
Just watched Three Days Of The Condor, he looked about 5'10, not ridiculously dwarfed by von Sydow, who was over 6'3". Mind you, Redford's hair gave him 2 inches !! Terrific film that.

Nik said on 27/Jan/20
It's amazing that he claimed to be 5'11.5"! Rob cares and I do too!

houss said on 25/Jan/20
Ian C. said on 5/Jul/19
The only Redford movie I have on DVD is Jeremiah Johnson and it is impossible to tell how tall he is in that, because there are no scenes in it where he is standing on level ground with another actor. His head seems large for his body, which suggests that he is short.

Redford seems quite vain. He goes out in public with a wig that only Bob Dylan could wear with a straight face, and he has allowed himself to be cast as a handsome man in a few movies when he was no longer handsome. So yeah, the guy could be a height liar, if only by an inch or two.
When was that "he allowed himself to be cast ...."

Hijoputamus said on 8/Nov/19
@Pud Woodie, Redford 5ft3? LOL

Rayovac said on 8/Oct/19
I wonder why this site lists so many actors as taller than they really are? It is so bad that I skip over the google results because I know it isn't accurate. I'm guessing it is the threat of legal action by the actor that is causing the problem. If an actor claims he is X height then this site lists him at the height claimed. But the whole point is to find out what their real height is, not the inflated number they claim. As far as Redford is concerned, we have documented evidence that he straight up lied about his height. He said he was 5 11.5 and then he said 5 10.5/10. So we know he has no problem lying about his height which means we can't take his word for it. That leaves us with pictures and anecdotal evidence. It is CLEAR he is shorter than 5-10 even at his peak. There are more than enough pics of him with other actors and you can easily see he is in the 5-8 range. Probably around 5-7 these days. There is nothing to suggest he is taller than that and everything that points to him being around 5-8.5 peak and now 5-7.

Val. said on 6/Jul/19
Pud Woodie, you sound delusional. Whatever you saw, we have plenty evidence and eye witnesses who have stood next to Redford, not to mention plenty confirmed height actors and actresses,with footwear seen and same surface seen, and the man was a strong 5'10 at least at his peak, he was that throughout the 70s and 80s, was very fit and lean always. Now in the 90s, I can believe 5'9.75 and 5'9.5 in the 00s, and in 2010s a flat 5'9. But 5'3 ? You gotta have been smoking those roofies hard back in them groovy 70s, Woodie.lol

Ian C. said on 5/Jul/19
The only Redford movie I have on DVD is Jeremiah Johnson and it is impossible to tell how tall he is in that, because there are no scenes in it where he is standing on level ground with another actor. His head seems large for his body, which suggests that he is short.

Redford seems quite vain. He goes out in public with a wig that only Bob Dylan could wear with a straight face, and he has allowed himself to be cast as a handsome man in a few movies when he was no longer handsome. So yeah, the guy could be a height liar, if only by an inch or two.

179cm guy said on 29/Jun/19
Rob, I think that Redford is in need of a quarter inch downgrade for both his peak and current listing. You can see from this series of pictures from September 20th, 2018 at the New York Premiere for his final film before retirement the Old Man and the Gun that he's noticeably edged out by 5'9 Casey Affleck whom you've said could be more of a weak 5'9 himself, Rob: ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) Redford had turned eighty-two about a month before these pictures were taken. Rob, you've said yourself that anywhere between 5'10-10.5 could be argued for his peak and it's clear that he only had 2cm on his frequent collaborator Paul Newman: ( Click Here ) Rob, based on these pictures I don't see how you can come to any other conclusion than the fact that Redford was a strong 5'10-10.5 range guy at his peak and a weak 5'8.5-9 range guy nowadays. Will you please give Redford 5'10.25 for his peak listing and 5'8.75 for his current listing Rob? It seems like the best compromise.

Ian C. said on 28/Jun/19
Put me down in the column that says Redford is about five foot seven, and has lied about being taller. Paul Woodie's post below is very convincing. He has never seemed like a big guy, and he moves with the speed and balance of a short man. I'm going to have to go back and look at a few of his movies, but if he really was five foot seven he will have pulled a lot of Frank Sinatra's tricks. The most common one is, he will have done a lot of scenes with other actors in which either he or they was sitting down or standing in the foreground.

Another giveaway of a short leading man is that he will have worked with a lot of short leading ladies. Also, he seems pretty hostile to the simple question, how tall are you? "If anyone cares." Well, we care Bob.

179cm guy said on 31/May/19
Peak: 178.5cm
Current: 174.5cm

179cm guy said on 24/May/19
Strong 5'10 Peak. Weak 5'9 Now. 4cm loss max.

Kapp said on 12/May/19
Losing a whole inch by 55-60 is a joke, an average male loses barely a cm by 60, an 82 yo man would most likely have easily lost more than 2 ins though. Tom Cruise hasn't lost even a quarter of an inch let alone a whole inch, a few mm at best lmao

Meltdown said on 7/May/19
How does a guy at 82 years old only lose 1.5 inches? You lose your first inch by 55–60, second inch by 70–75, third by 85–90. You can tell by the fact he is shorter than 5ft 7 Tom Cruise who also probably lost an inch by now making him closer to 5ft 6.

Pud Woodie said on 5/Apr/19
I personally saw Robert Redford standing and walking alongside Faye Dunaway. They were on location in Brooklyn Heights NYC while filming “Three Days of the Condor”. The film was released in 1975, so it was likely sometime in late 1973 or early 1974 that this happened. Redford was between 3-4 inches shorter than Dunaway. The scene was the two coming out of a doorway, going down a short set of steps, turning to their left and walking about 6 paces. I remember it very clearly because there were many takes of the scene. Redford was so much shorter than Dunaway that he came down the steps first and was closest to the camera, which was mounted on a trolly track. The camera was at an up angle and followed the two nearly parallel as they walked. That made it seem on film that Redford was equal to or taller than Dunaway. Nope. This site shows Dunaway at 5’7”. That seems accurate. That means Redford was about 5’3” or 5’4”. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and go with an extra inch or two even three, though I don’t think so. It’s still a long way from 5’ 10” or 11”. There’s simply no way the man was ever close to 5’10”. No way.

179cm guy said on 2/Mar/19
Rob now that Redford's officially retired from acting are you going to get rid of his current height listing? Also here are some pictures from the premiere for his last movie "The Old Man and the Gun" which came out late last year. ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) ( Click Here ) Would you say that he was still reaching 5'9 range for his last movie?

179cm guy said on 28/Feb/19
Rob, which of these would Redford have measured at his peak? Is the B range possible?

A) 182cm/180cm
B) 181.5cm/179.5cm
C) 181cm/179cm
D) 180.5cm/178.5cm
E) 180cm/178cm

Mister lennon said on 16/Jan/19
Redford was 5'10 peak and 5'9 today.

Wonder Boy said on 13/Jan/19
Just watched The Natural, then scene where Redford is on the mound, clearly he is short. 5'6"- 5'7", why someone would exaggerate their height that much is beyond me, he could easily just say 5'9" and no one would question it.

Think of the pitcher Pedro Martinez at 5'10" (and that may have been exaggerated) then look at Redford.

Dmeyer said on 9/Jan/19
5'11,5 shoes on Peak so not a lie

Paul zmitrowicz said on 30/Dec/18
you are all barking!! I know these cellulose action men are all your heroes and you WANT them to be tall and masculine.
Robert 5ft 7.5 max Paul Newman the same. Tom Cruise 5ft 5 if hes lucky.
All CSI Miami about 5ft 2.
Just look when they are standing in a doorway.
Redford hasnt stood properly in a scene for about 20 years.
King Diddy though is the guy in Hawaii 5 0.
Ha! trying to persuade evetybody that hes really 5ft 9 ! ha!

RichardSpain said on 23/Dec/18
Rob ...and you don`t forget movies like brubaker and "three days of the condor" great movies of mr Redford too. His best movies in my opinion....

5'11 to Robert or very close 5'11 is very credible forty years ago but not today obvious because he is 81 years old. Excellent actor Robert Redford.

Steven Ingle said on 20/Sep/18
I was having breakfast with family at the restaurant in Sundance ski resort Utah one morning in the mid 1990s when we saw Redford walking toward us from a distance of approx. 20 feet away and passed by us nor more than 3 feet away from our table and he appeared to be no more than 5'6"-5'7" max! Sorry Bob but fess up!

Ian C. said on 1/Apr/18
He sure was fast, which suggests that he was not all that tall. In Jeremiah Johnson he leaps around quite a bit, and I've freeze-framed the DVD in an effort to see if I can spot a stunt man. There must be in some of those shots, but it's impossible to be certain.

One of my little hobbies is freeze-framing actors doing quick draws in westerns, and Redford seems to be doing his own gun-handling in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Because he is left-handed his gun hand is on the far side of his body from the camera, so you can't really tell if he is drawing the gun. Most movie fast-draws are fakes. You freeze-frame them and it turns out that the actor had the cocked pistol in his hand already just below the bottom of the frame when he began the draw, and just brought it up and fired it. Many quick-draws result in the actor firing the pistol in such a way that the bullet would have struck the ground well short of the intended target. And most actors blink when the gun goes off. Check it out sometime.

AlAlAl said on 22/Jan/18
In Sneakers, there's a scene of him in jeans with a close up of the bottom of his pants and the hems have been taken up. The shortest leg you can get is 28" so I always assume his had to be shorter!

Rising - 174 cm said on 25/Sep/17
@Rob: Thanks for the answer. I mostly had in mind one scene which was a wide shot where they're walking side by side out of a hotel, iirc and it was difficult for me to even see Redford the same height, though I do think both men were probably 5'10" at the time or very close to it.

Rising - 174 cm said on 22/Sep/17
@ Rob: That's certainly true - look at Milo Ventimiglia! He apparently grew from 5'9" to 5'10" in his 30s due to uhhh, Yoga and did seem to stretch up in your recent pic with him. ;) Dolph Lundgren is another one. You have him quoted denying he's 198 cm to an interviewer yet the interviewer probably wouldn't have asked him if he were that tall had Dolph not claimed he was 6'6" back in 1985! Then there's Burt Reynolds who was almost famous for admitting he was under 6 feet yet you found him saying 6 feet in the same paper he had claimed 5'11" a mere 9 years earlier, then ups that claim to a bit over 6 feet!

Btw, on the subject of Redford's height, have you gotten a chance to check The Sting again? It's really difficult to see Redford a half inch taller than Robert Shaw seeing them side by side and it seems doubtful to me Shaw wore lifts since he was barely taller than Newman, if at all.

Rising - 174 cm said on 19/Sep/17
Interesting to see him stick to the 5'11.5" over at least a five year stretch as well as seeing him give a weight, though if he really were that height, I'd expect him to weigh more. It is kind of funny to see him saying "I've been 5-10 for a long time" a mere half decade later as if to say "what gave anyone the idea I was anything over than 5-10 to 5-10 1/2?" yet Redford himself was maintaining he was at least an inch taller not long before. I wonder if Redford did measure 5'11.5" in some sort of footwear or if he just picked that number because it was close to 6', but he didn't think he could pass for the full 6 feet, which is what I suspect Rob Lowe did.

Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Sep/17
@Arch: I'll have to check one, particularly to see him with Geoffrey Lewis who I'm pretty sure was about 5'9.5". But, I agree he just doesn't have the look of 5'10.5" guy on screen. Much more the build of a 177-178 cm guy, imo. 179 cm would likely look taller, imo, especially with cowboy boots or 70s footwear.

borntrip said on 13/Sep/17
if redford is about 5 ft 10 inches, assuming that lena olin is not shorter than 5 ft 9,5 inches, they must have used some tricks in the movie "havana"...because in some scenes, the difference seems to be more than 2 inches...

Arch Stanton said on 12/Sep/17
I still think 5'10.5 is too high, The Great Waldo Pepper from mid 70s struggling to see a guy close to 6 ft in shoes. As Rising says Redford looked nothing over 5'10 with Waterston and could look 177 at times.

Rising - 174 cm said on 6/Sep/17
Looked a good 3" shorter than 6'1" Sam Waterston in The Great Gatsby. You notice in period pieces like that or The Sting Redford looks completely average -- 5'9.5"-5'10" -- yet in films set in contemporary times he could look a tallish 5'10.5"-5'11". I believe this is because he wore normal 1" shoes for period pieces, but in films set in present day, he naturally wore the contemporary fashion of the day, which included heeled boots and Redford has often wore cowboy boots in the decades since. So I'm inclined to agree with Richard and say flat 5'10" peak and a flat 5'9" currently. I believe Redford when he said he'd been 5'10" for a long time. I think he just padded that with an extra half inch at times.

James said on 20/Aug/17
Redford was 5'8" in the 1970s. He's 5'7" today.

Richardspain said on 2/Aug/17
175 cm barefeet today
178cm young

jessman said on 1/Aug/17
Seem to recall Redford being described as 5'8 back in the 1980s.

Rising - 174 cm said on 31/Jul/17
Wow, Redford actually was really shorter than 5'10" Robert Shaw in The Sting, check it out: Click Here In a real version of the film, that's a wide shot, but you can still see clearly Redford isn't 1 cm taller. I don't think Shaw wore lifts either since he looked very similar to Paul Newman.

As for Redford and Newman, they could look very close to the same height, as you can see in this clip: Click Here Here's a couple of stills that are pretty representative: Click Here Click Here

You can argue Newman looked slightly taller at times like that, but I'd say they looked about the same most of the film and shortly after that, Redford looks taller, which you can see in 1:44:15 in my first link, but that part is cut off in that poor upload so this still is actually better: Click Here

Fwiw, some think Robert Shaw was more 176-177 cm range himself and that certainly looks plausible with Newman, but I can accept the full 5'10" for him and 177 for Redford. I believe Newman was most likely 176. I can also see a full 5'10" for Redford, but really not any taller seeing The Sting. He gives a taller impression in some films, but he really didn't look tallish in The Sting. Looked bang on average to me. If I didn't know better, I could have believed he was a 5'9" guy at times. But then he didn't have cowboy boots, thick boots or big heels like he did in some other films from his heyday. But like I said, I'll go 177 peak and 175 current. I see almost a 50/50 chance of 178 peak, though so maybe I'll go back to that if I see a film that's convincing. 179 just seems a stretch to me in The Sting.

@Bandet: That's a good point. A taller man will often lower his eye level while the shorter one raises his and some can come away with the impression they're about the same height. Otherwise, someone could see someone from a distance, see them walking with their head down, be on uneven ground or just not have any real perception of height. Random height estimates from anonymous sources should always be taken with a grain of salt. We're an exception on this site as we're unusually interested in height. Every now and then I'll meet someone who has a good perception of it, but many others don't have a clue. Outside of height in general, eye-witness testimony is often unreliable. Memories are influenced by any number of things and change over time. That's actually quite a fascinating subject in itself.

Bandet said on 20/Jul/17
Ron... Unfortunately seeing is not believing. I can guarantee that the vast majority who see a celebrity in person think they are shorter than they would
be unless that celebrity is over 6ft2. This is worth reposting from Seb:
It takes a trained eye to get someone's height by just comparing them to yourself. We all tend, and women are probably more susceptible, to under-guess someone's height. The best way, (shoe-wear aside), that we can compare someone's height to ourselves, is to see the reflections on either a mirror or a reflective surface. I believe many of the people that make guesses on the "eye-to eye" basis will be very surprised to discover just how tall others are in relation to themselves. I had lady friend of mine who would not admit to been less that 5'6" when our reflections as we stood equidistant from a reflective surface showed that she was about 3 inches shorter than me and I was 5'7½" (measured in bare feet) at the time. So I still ask: "How tall is Robert Redford, really?

Rising - 174 cm said on 19/Jul/17
I agree with you Rob, nothing under 5'9" and 176 cm is still possible. If he ever looks shorter, it's probably because he doesn't always have great posture these days or even a decade ago, such as in the pic above with Cruise. I noticed that Redford never had a particularly long torso relative to his height so if he had lost a lot, his torso would probably look shorter. I don't think he had really lost anything by mid 60s as he still looked a good 5'10" guy in The Last Castle in 2001. I do know someone who saw him in NY in the 70s and said he wasn't short, but average.

However, reading Arch's comments below does make me question his peak height a bit more again. Redford wore big heels and thick boots a lot and I always had suspicions he was more 177-178 cm. He does also say "I've been 5-10 for a long time" so whether he was padding his height with an extra half inch for the 5'10.5" or just rounding down for the 5'10" I don't know. I had thought he was always taller than Paul Newman, who I'm convinced was closer to 5'9" than 5'10"(maybe 176 cm max), so in particular the multiple comments about Redford being the same height or even shorter than Newman and 5'10" Robert Shaw have peaked my curiosity and I'll watch The Sting and The Great Gatbsy soon.

I found the scene I referenced below with Peter Boyle(6'2.25" here) Click Here

I'm not sure he actually looks 5'11" range there like I had previously thought rewatching it since he winds up walking in front of Boyle and gets a camera advantage, but before that, I could see Boyle 3.5"-4" taller, but you can see Redford has big 2 inch heeled boots.

Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Jul/17
Nobody ever said most men lose 2" by age 80. All we know is that an AVERAGE of approximately 1000 men sampled for a survey 40 years ago lost that. Redford doesn't need to be an exception because it's not a rule.

With that said, Redford looks 4" shorter than Obama to me last year(see my May 12th post below for the video) so I'd say he's likely more a flat 5'9" today. Still probably 176 cm 4-5 years ago in mid 70s and 5'9.5" a decade ago in his early 70s. Probably 5'10"-5'10.5" peak, though.

Danimal said on 10/Jul/17
He's 80 years old. Most men will have lost a full 2" by 80. Why is he the exception Rob?

RisingForce said on 2/Jun/17
Christian, I'm pretty sure it's just Redford's posture. He has a bad hunch there, plus Cruise has his arm around him, which is sometimes used as a trick to push the taller man down. Plus, we can't see their feet so for all we know, Cruise is on his toes there, which he's done before. This photo shows footwear that day and Tom's shoes actually look normal: Click Here Of course, Tom has worn lifts a lot, but not always around that time. If Tom had actually stood as tall as Redford that day with equal posture then it would mean Redford was nowhere near 5'9.5" by 2007, because even in Tom's biggest lifts and boots, he's only looked to hit about 177 cm making him equal to a 174-175 cm man in normal shoes.

Christian-196.5cm (6ft5 3/8) said on 28/May/17
Cruise must be wearing elevator shoes. He looks no shorter than Redford here.

RisingForce said on 12/May/17
He's had this listing for a while, I'd guess not above 5'9" last year with Obama: Click Here But hair and posture make it difficult to tell. Redford's posture has been able to make him look no more than 5'8" range for at least a decade now, but then he straightens up and he's taller than Shia Labeouf a few years ago and he wasn't looking much shorter than Dennis Quaid just a year and a half ago.

Ron said on 4/May/17
If you look at the comments from people who have seen Redford in person, just about ALL of them say that he is (was) shorter than they expected. Most eye witnesses have concluded that he is (was) anywhere from 5' 6" to maybe 5' 8" barefoot. And if someone has seen Redford numerous times up close, and they say that he's around 5' 6", or 5' 7", or 5' 8", those are the people I'm going to pay attention to. The rest of you are simply guessing. And I'm not trying to single-out Redford who happens to be a great human being. This scenario applies to ANYone. The old saying comes to mind: "Seeing is believing".

Ron said on 4/May/17
In the late 1970's, my sister and brother-in-law saw Redford up close in a ski lodge in Utah. My Brother-in-law, who is 5' 11", said that Redford was "shorter than me"(brother-in-law). My sister, who was standing about 10 feet away, said that Redford was definitely shorter than her husband. BTW: My brother-in-law was a football coach at that time. He knows how to judge heights. He said that Redford was surprisingly short, about 5' 10" with shoes.

Leo2001 said on 22/Apr/17
With Newman:
Click Here

Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 17/Apr/17
Looks 176-177cm today. Still not bad for an 80 year old

RichardSpain said on 7/Apr/17
Maybe near 179cm when he was young. Today he is a old man. I think he is 176 cm today, 177cm is possible. He has good genetics

Dr. Bombaye said on 6/Apr/17
I'm 5'9' on a good day. Sometime in the late 70s I worked at a restaurant at Vail on the mountain. Redford was there skiing that day and walked past me in the restaurant in ski boots - he nodded at me which I thought was cool. Incredible handsome man. I was at least 3 inches taller than him, which surprised me. He's suppose to be a really good skier, which I don't doubt. But he's not anywhere near 5'10'.

SonnyboySlim said on 22/Mar/17
Peak: 5'10.5"
Now: 5'.9"... maybe.

RisingForce said on 13/Mar/17
That's because Redford is slouching in that pic with Cruise, Redford was still comfortably taller: Click Here It's almost impossible to find a pic from the above event where Redford isn't slouching, but Cruise may have also had lifts since he didn't look too short next to Andrew Garfield either, but Redford still seemed taller with decent posture: Click Here

john hofman said on 10/Mar/17
He looks to be 1 inch shorter than Tom Cruise.

James said on 28/Feb/17
Looked 5'8" with Bush.

RisingForce said on 17/Feb/17
I think it's quite the opposite with Newman. Redford clearly looked taller to me and was no less than a weak 5'10", possibly a legit 5'10" and doesn't seem to have lost much when he stands up straight as we saw with him taller than Shia Labeouf, who is probably 5'8.5" a few years ago. Meanwhile, I think Newman peaked at closer to a flat 5'9" and was also shorter than McQueen, who I believe was around 5'9.5".

Vibram said on 18/Oct/16
He was more like 178cm peak and 176cm today.

Andy said on 27/Sep/16
Redford was never taller than Newman, I would say Newman was 179 cm peak while Redford was 177.5 cm, more like 176 cm today

Pete said on 21/Aug/16
I'd say Redford was 5'9 1/2 at his max height. But he's now 80 years old (although still has good posture). In "A Walk in the Woods" he looks only about 1 1/2 to 2 inches shorter than Nick Nolte (but he could have been wearing lifts in his hiking boots to even out the height difference a little. So nowadays I'd put him closer to 5 8 1/2 to 5'9. The pic with Cruise....well Cruise is well known for wearing lifts, so their apparently equal height shouldn't be too surprising.

Simon said on 21/Aug/16
In The Sting where he is 37 years old, I felt he gave a very average-height-ish impression. Definetely no more than 177, so 179 cm peak height should probably be ruled out. A guy with good posture near 5'11 generally doesn't look short unless he's with 6'4 people, and I see some people in the comment section saying this about Redford.

Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 15/Aug/16
I buy 5ft10½ barefoot and 5ft11½ shoes

Dan said on 25/Apr/16
Years ago my girlfriend's mother was Redford's wife's best friend. I was invited to a dinner party by my girlfriend and the Redford's were going to be there but I had to cancel at the last minute. My girlfriend told me afterwards that he was the same height as me - I was 5'9 3/4" barefoot. Redford always wore cowboy boots - some with riding heels - the 'high heels' of cowboy boots, or higher heeled shoes in all his films, except Butch Cassidy and The Sting, which was perhaps because he didn't need to appear taller than Paul Newman (as they were the same size). I remember reading (New Yorker?) Redford himself saying, "What's the difference if I'm 6 feet of 5 9 & 3/4?" In the "Current Biogragphy Yearbook" of the early 70's, it said he "stands 6 feet tall;" the updated version in the eighties after he won the Academy Award stated "Redford is 5'10" tall and weighs 170 pounds." It seems in Hollywood to be a leading man you have to be "6 feet" but as a director, he could be 5'10. He definitely wasn't taller than that.

charlie said on 18/Feb/16
In Hollywood there is not to many actors over 5 foot 9 inches. I would say less than 1% of male actors are actual 5 foot 8 or less . Robert Redford never ever struck me as 5 foot 9 inches in his 1970s movies. The way We Were All I kept thinking about was how short he appeared. Now I am 5 foot 10 inches and I appear very tall in flat feet and in shoes I can only imagine hoe tall I appear to people. Robert when wearing big boots appeared a 5 foot 8 inches. Robert Redford is now 5 foot 5 inches and in his prime he was 5 foot 6.5 maybe 5 foot 7 inches no more than that.

ProMich said on 10/Feb/16
The director of a company I work for had to go to a business function in Utah, of which RR was in attendance, he said he was shorter than he expected. The director (not a movie director), said he was close to, if not, his height, 5'8''.

Arch Stanton said on 6/Jan/16
I suppose if he claimed 5'10.5 and 5'11.5 there's a good chance he was around 5'10.5 barefoot but I think evened up a bit. He could look 5'10 flat a lot.

Arch Stanton said on 4/Jan/16
@Rob, any chance of a slight downgrade to 5'10.25? I've seen most of his late 60s and early 70s films and 179 does look a little high. I think he looked in 5'10-5'10.5 range generally. At times he could barely look 5 ft 10 see the Great Gatsy with Sam Waterson. About a Daniel Craig listing I think would be more accurate. Is 5'10.25 peak and 5'9.25 now possible?

Guest said on 31/Dec/15
Hi Rob, Here is a picture of Redford next to Fonda barefoot when they were shooting Barefoot in the Park. Would you say his peak height is still 5'10.5" from this picture?

Click Here

Paleman said on 26/Dec/15
The 5'11.5 claim in his youth was probably a shoe listing, he could've been close to that mark in his heyday with shoes on. Barefoot, he seemed like a 5'10 guy. Shorter now, looked more like a strong 5'9" in Winter Soldier.

Gabriel said on 18/Nov/15
I know a few in the media that have met him and one interviewed him. My interviewer friend described him as a "small white raisin." By all, he was described as 5-7 or 5-8 and very thin.

You're often too generous Rob.

guest said on 29/Sep/15
The pics with Cruise can be questioned due to not seeing the footwear.
I'd say RR is 5 ft. 9, more or less.

Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 5/Sep/15
Arch, I really think he was the Brad Pitt of his era. Similar looks and proportions but maybe a little more artistically fulfilled (not knocking Pitt at all, seen great stuff from him).

Close to 5ft11 peak

Arch Stanton said on 5/Sep/15
Watching Midnight in Paris the other day and Owen Wilson from certain angles looked uncannily like Robert Redford from a distance from behind/the side in it, reminded me of him in height too and Owen Wilson is between 5'10 and 5'11 too.

Papa Oz said on 31/Aug/15
I have stood next to both Redford and Newman. Neither is above 5' 4" tall.

Chase Witherspoon said on 2/Aug/15
Always seemed to me like an average punter, 175-176 region with footwear to fit the occasion...

mike said on 6/Jul/15
Robert Redford looks no shorter than Tom Cruise. ...probably the same height. ..
if Tom is 6'4".....then Redford is no shorter...
how tall is Tom Cruise? ??

Sam said on 30/Jun/15
Arch, in the final scene of The Sting I thought from memory Redford and Newman walk away together and Redford looks about an inch taller than Newman...

Sean73 said on 12/May/15
I think the reason why people assume he's close to six foot is because he's high wasted. The guy is all legs. Just watch the scene in All The Presidents Men were he's walking towards the pay phone in brown pants. They go all the way up to his belly button. I think Rob is dead on with this one.

Delahunte said on 9/May/15
Rob, quite surprised to find that Katherine Ross isn't listed on here. Anyways, Redford seems around 5'8, judging from personal encounters and the pic with Cruise. Downgrade perhaps?

Harley said on 9/May/15
Couple months ago he was measured as 174cm.

Arch Stanton said on 6/Mar/15
In Three Days of the Condor looks about 5 ft 10 but in the lift with Max von Sydow oddly looked about 6 ft next to him!

CDS said on 23/Feb/15
A MovieLine or Premiere magazine issue from 1996 featured an article on how tall movie stars actually are vs. what they claim- had an "official height" listing, as well as a "best guess". I was a bit surprised at Redford's listings- his official 5'10" listing, and the "best guess" had him at 5'8". On screen, he had always looked about 5'11" to me- held his own with the 6 footers, yet seemed a little taller than those who claimed to be 5'10". Now, I'm reading through this thread, and seeing the height 5'7" show up repeatedly by those who have met him in person?? On the behind-the-scenes of the film "Lions for Lambs", he did look about the same height as 5'7" Tom Cruise, which I find odd since on the set of "River Runs Through It" he looked about the same height as 5'11" Brad Pitt-?? WTf?? Well, anyway, I think he's like Kirk Douglas, has that build of a little guy. Like Douglas, he seems to be wearing boots that may boost him up a few inches-?? I'm guessing the 5'10" claim is a bit off. I'll give him 5'9" peak (5'10" in shoes, hence the 5'10" listing), and now maybe a little under 5'8"-??-hence all the 5'7" claims...

Arch Stanton said on 12/Feb/15
I highly recommend Jeremiah Johnson Rob and page viewers if you've not seen it. A classic western I think. Sydney Pollack. Redford looks uncannily like Brad Pitt in Seven Years in Tibet in it!

Arch Stanton said on 11/Feb/15
Three Days of the Condor also worth adding. You might also state he's a director and some of his directed films..

Arch Stanton said on 11/Feb/15
Rob can you add Out of Africa and Jeremiah Johnson?

BLHMD said on 6/Feb/15
I'm 5' 7-3/4" I"m taller than him by about an inch. (Stood next to him in Provo, Sundance, Park City). Maybe he's taller at sea level?

RO said on 7/Dec/14
In the late 1970's my sister saw Redford up close. And by "up close", I'm talking a distance of about 6 feet. This is not nice to say, but when my sister was telling us that she saw Redford in person, she was giggling at how short he was. She said he was about 5'8" (with shoes on). Her husband concurred.

Sam said on 1/Dec/14
Definitely shorter in The Winter Soldier, looked in the range of 3 inches shorter than Chris Evans.

Mert said on 27/Nov/14
I also waited on Redford years ago while working at Snowbird in Utah. First off Tom Cruise is 5'7" and Redford looks the same size. I am 6' 2 1/2". I was absolutely floored at how much I looked down on Robert. He was VERY dynamic, very kind, and very striking. He was with 2 daughters and couldn't have been more polite, but he was nowhere near the 5' 10" claimed - 5'8" max!

john smith said on 20/Nov/14
In the picture Cruise is 1 inch taller, so if Tom Cruise is 6-2 then Redford must be 6-1, both are great guys.

TJ said on 19/Nov/14
I saw him in person and up close about 15 years ago when I worked in a theatre and he came through my door. Absolutely no way is he 5"10'. Was struck by how petite and small boned he was. No more than 5"5'or 5"7' max. He was standing next to my 5"10' co-worker (male) who towered over him.

So Cal Russ said on 22/Oct/14
Back in the late 1970's, my sister and brother-in-law stood next to Redford in a ski resort. My brother-in-law, who is 5'10 1/2, was noticeably taller than Redford. My sister said that Redford was maybe 5'9 1/2 (with shoes on).

Sean said on 8/Sep/14
Fascinating how different pictures can look so different. Here he is looking a few inches taller than Cruise. 5'11.5" claim is absurd.
Click Here

Ingle said on 6/Sep/14
In 1990 Redford walked past my dinner table at Sundance and he was short! My guess, 5'5-5'6, 5'7 max.at that time.

John said on 27/Jul/14
Peak height 5'9".
Present height 5'8"

Jeff C said on 8/Jul/14
This is one photo Tom Cruise feels pretty good about it.

nikos said on 7/Jul/14
Rob, someone had once put a video on this site with 5'10.5 tellis savallas on an interview saying "robert redford is short!!!". Can we find it?

Az said on 8/Jun/14
Robert Redford is probably 5'8 according to this pic? Garfield 5'10 Tom 5'7.....dunno....met tom cruise in Arizona about 10 years ago and he's under 5'7.....so I guess Redford is short too. Had no idea! Always imagined him 6 foot

RisingForce said on 30/May/14
Watched The Candidate not long ago, and he did actually typically look more 5'11" range than 5'10" alongside Peter Boyle, including full body shot indoors earlier in the movie, though Redford had heeled boots at that point. Could have been honest with that second 5'10.5" claim and been giving himself an inch or a shoes height with the initial 5'11.5" claim. In that case, I'd guess he's lost about an inch, which isn't bad at all for someone 77 years old.

RisingForce said on 6/May/14
I don't think he's lost much height. He's losing quite a bit of height due to posture with Cruise and generally looked taller than Cruise at the premieres, and more recently, he still looked taller than Shia LaBeouf. I think he was always around 5'10" and has only lost 1 cm, maybe slightly more, but can look more due to bad posture, which is to be expected when you're 77.

ScottyO said on 4/May/14
Looking at the stills from "Barefoot in the Park" 1967
RR is barefoot..and Jane is in go go boots. Standing
side by side he is about 2" taller. She is listed at 5'8"
He was around 30 then. Even the best of us shrink....lol

Realist said on 4/May/14
Rob i think the best shout is 174 cm. Peak was 177-178 (in his 20s-30s). I have ti agree here he does need significant downgrade.

jamieorr4 said on 25/Apr/14
he probably is about 5ft7 but because of hes built he looks taller his built does look 5ft9 but i say hes 5ft7 max

somerandomguy said on 23/Apr/14
Probably no less than a solid five nine.

mike.. said on 20/Apr/14
Robert Redford is not a tall man...not a six footer by any chance.....if he been over six feet he probably
would have been even more popular...
I think even his bootsize is rather tiny...maybe 7/8...

AJ said on 12/Apr/14
Just saw winter soldier, and sam jackson towred over this guy, the tallest I can see him being is 175, with 174 more likely being current heihgt. I'd say 175 now and 178 peak.

nrubsol said on 5/Mar/14
I stood next to him at the Sundance ski resort back in the early eighties. He was no taller than my 5' 7". The absolute tallest he could be is 5' 9". Since he's in his 70's I'd bet he's shrunk to 5' 7" or shorter.

MD said on 25/Feb/14
I never understand comments like these. They pop up every once in awhile, here. If you do not care how tall hs is, then why are you here? The name of this website is celebheights.com. If their height doesn't interests you, then their height shouldn't interest you.

Sas said on 23/Feb/14
Who really cares how tall he is. He is one great actor.

CAS said on 11/Feb/14
177-177.5, here he is with 179 Garfield and 170 Cruise (wearing lifts). Click Here Andrew is wearing converse so Redford has about just under an inch of footwear advantage and they are about the same height, perhaps give a cm to garfield. So listing is correct.

71inches said on 7/Feb/14
But he looks so short in front of 511.5 chris evans in the winter soldier trailer?

Dyno Don said on 26/Jan/14
Years ago I boarded a plane right behind Redford and got a very good look at him for probably five minutes. I was quite surprised at how short he is. I'm a shade over 6' tall and he is much shorter than me. I would put him at 5'8" or 5'9" max.

So Cal Russ said on 1/Jan/14
In the late 1970's, my sister and her husband saw Robert Redford in a ski lodge in Utah. My brother-in-law, who is 5' 10", was standing about 4 feet from Redford on a level floor. My sister, who was standing about 10 feet away from the two men, says that Robert Redford was noticeably shorter than her 5' 10" husband. And Redford was wearing boots. My sister says that Redford was/is probably around 5' 8" barefoot. He has a slender frame which is why he does not look short in movies (unless he's standing next to someone who is 6 feet+). When you think about it, are there any movies where Redford has been paired with another actor who is taller than maybe 5' 11"? I can't think of any.

caesar999 said on 29/Dec/13
Redford was 5'10, but remember he's 77 years old. I think now he's no more than 5'7.

Ryan Hung said on 24/Dec/13
To me, Redford is a 175-175.5 cm guy. Right at that 5'9" range.

cairns said on 24/Nov/13
Redford was born with 3 legs and 2 feet...he is 5ft 4inches tall and speakes with a lisp...hens the chinese call him Lobert Ledford..

Arch Stanton said on 15/Nov/13
Maybe nearer 3 inches shorter than 6'1" Waterson. In comparison he looks no more than 5'10", more 177cm IMO.

Arch Stanton said on 15/Nov/13
Waterson looks 4 inches taller.

Arch Stanton said on 15/Nov/13
No way was he 5'10.5" next to 6'1" Sam Waterson in The Great Gatsby. More 5'9.5" then IMO.

grannybug said on 17/Oct/13
I fist met Robert Redford in the early 80's when he hosted a fundraiser at Sundance resort for Utah Gov. Scott Matheson's re-election campaign. The "agreed-on" height guess at the time was 5'8" & that seems right to me judging by seeing him then (in cowboy boots) and because it was my father's height as well. I saw him & spoke to him several other times when hiking at Sundance in the summers & standing in the aisle after a showing of "Waiting for the Moon" at Sundance Film Festival in Park City in 1987. 5'10" is wishful thinking, I'm afraid. But who cares?? He was & is handsome, gracious, charming, talented and involved in things far more important than his own looks or height. Funny story: every time I told male friends that I was going to the fundraiser & would get to meet Redford, the men would say, "He's not as tall as you think;" "He's not as good looking in person as on screen;" even (from my boyfriend) "He's got too many freckles." When I said to Gov. Matheson's campaign manager that I was excited to meet Redford and "yes, I know he's not as good looking or as tall as I think," Lonnie looked thoughtful and said, "I don't know about that, I'd change with him anytime." I think Lonnie was the only honest man in Utah!

Arch Stanton said on 1/Oct/13
About 2 inches taller than Klaus Maria Brandauer who I think was 5 ft 8 in Out of Africa. Not sure he was quite as high as 179, I think he looked more 177-8 peak.

Arch Stanton said on 1/Oct/13
The Sting is a great film indeed. He seemed a little shorter than Robert Shaw I thought which is odd as he was 5'10". Watching Out of Africa now and he looks around 5'10". At times he looks uncannily like Brad Pitt, he looks more like you'd imagine Pitt's father to look like than most sons and their real fathers!

Arch Stanton said on 24/Sep/13
Rob have you seen The Sting? Strangely he looks quite short in that film and seemed shorter than both Robert Shaw and Paul Newman.

Sam said on 3/Sep/13
Apparently all actors shrink upon getting around Lion. While the other listings are semi-believable, I can't believe Redford under 5'10" at peak. There's just too much evidence that he's in that 5'10" range.

Lion said on 1/Sep/13
Absolutly not more than 5ft 5 1/2". I've met him in Rome Film Festival and he was as short as Tom Cruise that was near him. I've seen their shoes...so big lifts... they reached 5ft 8! As like Mr Pitt...ahah! Nothing more than 5ft 8 1/2" barefoot..just watch Spy Game...

Arch Stanton said on 31/Aug/13
He looks a similar height to Paul Newman in Butch Cassidy, maybe a bit taller.

Will said on 10/Aug/13
Robert Redford at 5ft 10 is a joke. He is more like 5'8" even.

Ian C. said on 23/Jul/13
Robert Redford plays Big Halsy in the movie, Little Fauss and Big Halsy. So okay, they just picked that title because it's poetic, and in fact Redford was bigger than Michael J. Pollard, who played Little Fauss, but all the same, I would like a man who plays a character called Big Halsy to be, y'know, big. But they should have called the movie Little Fauss and Average Sized Halsy.

David said on 13/Jul/13
Well,i don't buy it at all, i always thought Redford was about 5ft 8 with 1 inch shoe heels on.That is just my opinion.

Dave in Minneapolis. said on 23/Jun/13
My sister and I were at an Energy Conservation fair at the St.Paul Civic Center in the fall of 1981 or so. My sister who is 5'9 3/4" stood next to him when he was checking out the fair booths. She was wearing tennis shoes, she was taller than him and he was wearing cowboy boots. There were tons of people swarmed around as if he were Elvis. He was a superstar back then. He was the keynote speaker. He quipped "I came to look at the energy exhibits. I didn't know I would become one!'. There's a photo of him and Paul Newman from the Butch movie where they are standing side by side and he is crouched down so in the picture he won't look taller than Newman but he still looks an inch taller than Newman. If Newman is 5'8" Redford was maybe 5'9" at his peak.

Dave in Minneapolis. said on 23/Jun/13
My sister and I were at an Energy Conservation fair at the St.Paul Civic Center in the fall of 1981 or so. My sister who is 5'9 3/4" stood next to him when he was checking out the fair booths. She was wearing tennis shoes, she was taller than him and he was wearing cowboy boots. There wwre tons of people swarmed around as if he were Elvis. He was a superstar back then. He was the keynote speaker. He quipped "I came to look at the energy exhibits. I didn't know I would become one!'.

JoeHeight said on 15/Jun/13
I was a waiter. RR walked in to ballroom for a premiere. He smiled. The attendees applauded. The whole room became energized. He seemed to me to be 10 feet tall. True height: his shoes made him 5'11".

The Racing Snake said on 31/May/13
I'm 5'2" and he was a good two or three inches shorter than me when I met him. I'd say Redford was about 4'11"!

Hank Jr said on 14/May/13
I've known him in Park City and he's 5' 6".

megankalu said on 18/Mar/13
Well, Morgan Freeman is 6'2" and there's a scene in "An unfinished Life" where Robert redford is standing right next to Morgan and he looks only 2 or 3 inches shorter. So 5'10 seems right for Mr. Redford.

Seb said on 5/Mar/13
It takes a trained eye to get someone's height by just comparing them to yourself. We all tend, and women are probably more susceptible, to under-guess someone's height. The best way, (shoe-wear aside), that we can compare someone's height to ourselves, is to see the reflections on either a mirror or a reflective surface. I believe many of the people that make guesses on the "eye-to eye" basis will be very surprised to discover just how tall others are in relation to themselves. I had lady friend of mine who would not admit to been less that 5'6" when our reflections as we stood equidistant from a reflective surface showed that she was about 3 inches shorter than me and I was 5'7½" (measured in bare feet) at the time. So I still ask: "How tall is Robert Redford, really?

Mike said on 3/Feb/13
Mr. Redford never even stood 5ft 10. He seemed much shorter, like 5'7 1/2". Now you have me bring up Redford's height, I have to look deeper into how tall he had stood, yes 5ft 8. End of story people. Recap again, he certainly ain't 5ft 11.

Will said on 28/Jan/13
Robert Redford has a small frame, so he stands no taller than 5ft 8.

MHouillon said on 28/Jan/13
5-9 - no more. 176-177cm peak.

JaneEyre said on 23/Jan/13
My husband met him last week and guessed his height to be 5'7".

Arch Stanton said on 14/Jan/13
Always looked an obvious 5'10 er to me in his prime.

Chuck said on 28/Dec/12
Back in the 70's while snow skiing at park city, a cashier at a grocery store said he shopped there and she said he was short. So no way is he 5'10 or 5'11 as he claims.

Copnovelist195 said on 9/Nov/12
A 6ft2 friend of mine was on a flight with him. He always maintained Redford was 5ft11 until he met him. He puts him at 5ft7 and slightly built with it.

John said on 29/Sep/12
I met him at a premiere in San Francisco back when he was 53. I remember his height back then. Fact:
He was 5'10" in cowboy boots. He's 5'9" without them. He's probably 5'8'' now at 76 years old.

Will said on 8/Sep/12
Robert Redford is never 5'10" barefoot in his life ever. He is just a slender 5'8 1/2".

kevin said on 6/Sep/12
peak 179cm barefoot and 182cm in shoes. today he still edges shia labouf out. so 177-176cm is reasonable.

Alex H said on 12/Feb/12
Watching "Three Days of the Condor" on TCM. I could have sworn he was 6 feet or around there. Maybe he wears platform shoes. And it could also be hos posture and build that makes him appear taller.

@ everyone said on 30/Jan/12
According to jo jo's pic (Cruise is close to 5'8" according to this site) he still looks pretty close to 5'11" to me, he's got a little around 2 inches on him and he's got worse posture. Or are we gonna put Tom Cruise at 5'4" to make Robert Redford 5'7"??? Considering how old Redford is, I really believe he was 5'11.5" at his peak

Daniel said on 27/Jan/12
All the people who are saying that he is 5'10 are only going by what they've seen on screen. It is well known that actors usually appear taller on screen because of both camera tricks and wearing lifts. Robert Redford must have worn lifts, because he is no where near 5'10. I met him back in the early 80s, stood right next to him, (and I am not very tall-about 5'9) he was definitely a couple of inches shorter than me and that is with him wearing shoes. The people who are saying he is around 5'7 are correct. He is a petite man, and I really don't know why he was so insecure about it. Notice how he went from saying that he was 5'10 than added another inch to his supposed height. Well, sorry he is no where near the height he claimed to be. Maybe for some reason he wishes he were 5'10-5'11, but he is definitely around 5'7. If you have met him and he appeared taller than that to you then he must have been wearing lifts that day.

Hector said on 24/Jan/12
I've always thought he was 5'9, maybe 5'10 in shoes (though I'm aware that people always seem taller when you see them on screen). I'm really surprised that he would lie about his height. I've always thought of him as having higher self-esteem than that. However, there are way too many people who have actually met him and swear that he is below 5'8. These people don't really have a reason to lie about something like that, so I don't doubt them. I think he really is 5'7-5'8, especially in looking at pictures of him standing next to other actors. He is just one of those people that has a body type that makes him appear taller than he really is when you see him from a distance. But like I said I find it odd he got so upset about doubts about his true height. I always thought he's not the type of person to care about being taller.

jo jo said on 19/Jan/12
Click Here

RR = 5' 9''

@ Dale, dave, etc, etc... said on 9/Jan/12
It makes more sense to me -specially in this forum- thinking that people lie and say he's short (to somehow feel better with themselves 'cause they have a height complex)than thinking that people lie and say he's tall. Again, I shook his hand and spent almost a minute by his side some months ago. I was on sandals and I am 5'9" he was on VERY regular shoes and had at least an inch on me (Why TF would I lie?). Honestly, people here climbing they have met him and he's 5'6" and **** like that are either lying or just sick

Dmeyer said on 12/Dec/11
179 peak 178 50s 176-7 now

Dale said on 5/Nov/11
Well, being involved in Theatre and in shows. I myself am a small featured man. My brother saw the suit in wore in the "Sting" and told me, it would fit me to a Tee. I am only 5'3". If you have any doubts about how tall Robert Redford is. Watch "The Natural" the scene at the end where he breaks his bat. As he walks out to get his broken bat, tell me this is a man that is 5'7 to 5'10. I think you will see is very small indeed. Look at his hands also.

dave said on 28/Oct/11
I have met him. I am 5.7.5...he is shorter than I am. Anyone who says otherwise has either never met him or just making it up for some weird reason.

Russ said on 14/Sep/11
If you read the comments from people who have seen Redford in person, in casual settings where he doesn't need to appear tall, they all say that Redford was/is about 5'7' or 5'8". My sister saw him up close. She said that he was no mo more than 5'8" max. and had a small frame.

Taylor said on 8/Sep/11
Compare his height to Streisand.
I am 5/11 and have stood eye to eye many times with RR. He ain't 5/11 or 5/10 or even 5/9.

jake said on 30/Jul/11
He was 5ft10- 5ft10.5 (maybe at best) peak. Nowadays he is 5ft9 (175 cm). He was a couple of inches below Pitt in Spy Game.

Legend said on 21/Jul/11
I believe CCC

CCC said on 9/Jul/11
I have worked up at the foundry grill/tree room at his resort at sundance for several years now. He comes to eat several times a week and I can tell you with 100% certainty that he is no taller than 5'7. He is a tiny man.

@PatB said on 7/Jul/11
And to all the people the claim he is 5'6": have you stood by him? how tall are you? if u are 6'2" how can u so easily estimate his height? the guy is skinny and looks small in the distance but to me -and I take a look at this site every once in a while- who payed a lot of attention to his footwear and posture, was kind of frustrating to realize he was taller than me even when I was trying to make myself as tall as possible and he was kind of relaxed. Specially after reading everybody's estimations posted here. I have no reason to lie and I didn't see him from the distance in an airport. I really stood by him and shook his hand. Also, very cool and down to earth guy, not the type of person that would lie about his height. To me, both of his claims above are right. Prolly in the fist one he was a lil shorter tbcause of height loss.

@PatB said on 7/Jul/11
well I have met him face to face, I shook his hand and really payed attention to his height, I am 5'9" and was in sandals, he was wearing the most common shoes u can imagine and he was at least one or two inches taller than me, and I am talking about like two months ago. He is very skinny although he has kind of a round belly that pops out

TruebloodFan said on 6/Jul/11
when a guy is so cool, it's easy to mask height. similar things happen with Tom Cruise, Mel Gibson and Anthony Hopkins. I really don't have a clue how tall this guy is. never noticed anything special about his height. I know he's not tall, but 5ft8, 9, 10 even a strong 5ft7, are all possibilities. 5ft9 is the safest estimate lol

Marc said on 4/Jul/11
he looked about 6 inches or so taller than Dustin Hoffman who is said to be 5'5" back in the 70's so I think 5'11" Peak is fair and more like 5'9.5" nowdays he lost height that's for sure

Jon said on 30/Jun/11
My friend working at Wimbledon, saw him not only is he wearing a hairpiece but suspicious footwear and still barely 5'8, how vain, 5'10 oh how he wishes!!!
Peak height 5'7-5'8

jake said on 18/Jun/11
5' 10.25 peak, 5' 9 flat nowadays.

Bon_ said on 28/May/11
Thank you, aslan, that is much closer to the truth. I hope soon enough we will again have testimonies about RR's true height to debunk these annoying PR-s and fanboys.

PatB said on 27/May/11
There is a pattern here. Those who have met him face to face seem to agree that he is about 5'6" or 5'7". Those who think he's taller seem to be largely movie fans who judge by how he looks on the screen.

aslan said on 24/May/11
About 10 years ago we had a family reunion at Sundance in Utah. My wife walked by Mr Redford in a narrow hall and they exchanged greetings. She told me she was surprised that she looked down on him a bit height wise and she
was only wearing low shoes-she is 5'6.5" tall. Maybe he had shrunk some (he was already in his mid 60's) but at the time she estimated 5'5" based on her close encounter.

will said on 25/Apr/11
As I stated before, Redford is a 5'10 guy. He was quite taller than Demi on indecent proposal and, on real life, also quite taller than his former partner Sonia Braga, who refused Pacino's courtship on the ground that he was too small.

Will said on 11/Apr/11
Robert Redford is 5'10" tall.

tell-em said on 1/Mar/11
brad pitt is 5'10" maximum and could be less. him and redford are roughly the same height.

Will said on 1/Mar/11
Robert Redford is 5'9". He is 2 inches shorter than 5'11" Brad Pitt.

tell-em said on 28/Feb/11
LOL bon has no proof of robert redford at 5'7"

Bon_ said on 27/Feb/11
@ tell-em

yeah, pictures with various tricks, like that on Farrell's page when a woman was supposed to be 'Farrell' lol

Viper said on 25/Feb/11
He looked at least 5-9 peak.

tell-em said on 25/Feb/11
Bon_ says on 24/Feb/11
tell-em, what proof DO YOU have ? say something constructive or get outta here at once

LOL. every single picture redford is on and the simple fact that he claimed that height. thats proof right there. where's your's?

Tom said on 25/Feb/11
Redford is as tall as he said he was -- 5'10". All the "short" comments are RIDICULOUS!! The guy is a LEGEND and full of truth.

Bon_ said on 24/Feb/11
tell-em, what proof DO YOU have ? say something constructive or get outta here at once

davcomp said on 17/Feb/11
I met him in the Salt Lake airport...barely 5'7" if not 5'6"

tell-em said on 17/Feb/11
lol at 5'8" or 5'7" for redford. what proof do you have you troll?

Bon_ said on 10/Feb/11
Downgrade to 5'8 at least needed pronto. It is hillarious to see how these liars can get away with their krap while those who are honest and don't care much about their height are downgraded.

Anonymous said on 5/Feb/11
i have met and done work for redford at hs home he is about 5 7 154we

Bon_ said on 3/Feb/11
Paul Newman was not 5'6, Jillian. Nice try, but you won't cure your frustrations this way. Redford likely was around 5'6.

Jillian said on 2/Feb/11
I remember the last scene in The Sting where Newman and Redford are walking off together. Their height looks about the same. I saw Paul Newman up close many years ago when he was filming a movie called The Secret War of Harry Frigg. He was really small...not more than 5'6". That last scene in The Sting has always made me think Redford was about the same.

authorsue said on 21/Jan/11
I was standing next to Redford when hen was filming Electric Horseman, and he is really tiny. I agree with Bon; Redford is 5'7" on his best day.

Bon said on 7/Jan/11
LMAO full inch, Redford was probably like 5'7 on his best day.

Mr. Kaplan said on 5/Jan/11
Rob, you really think he had a full inch on Paul Newman?

Bon said on 14/Dec/10
There are too many sightings of him being clearly below 5'8 not to allow a possibility that he really wasn't nowhere near his listed peak height.
In Hollywood everything is possible at least...

Mr. R said on 10/Dec/10
@Bon: I mean he may look over 5-11 in his boots, so, below 5-10 without them.

Brad said on 9/Dec/10
As listed in '10, bit higher in '86 on the big stage at Universal running through some fire on "Legal Eagles", I should know I was 1 foot from him. 5' 6" is laughable and he's not slender.

lem said on 9/Dec/10
I stood and talked with Robert Redford in 2001, in San Francisco.
I was one of five people present, and we were all standing still.
He was about my height (I am 5'6"), and certainly no more than one
inch taller. I was struck by two things: how small he was, and how
finely-boned. I would say that people are fooled about his height
because he is so slender--if you think he is tall, you would look at
how lean he is and then mistakenly assume him to be taller, so long
as you were not actually standing next to him. He is, essentially,
petite. [Singer Tony Bennett is 5'6", and when they are in the same
photograph, Robert seems to be shorter than Tony. Look for a photo
where Robert and Tony are standing by a Christmas Tree in the White
House, wearing their Kennedy center Honoree medals . . .
Tina Turner is almost 5'4", Paul Newman was about 5'9".]

Bon said on 6/Dec/10
Mr. R, are you suggesting that Redford was no more than 5'8 at peak, or does that apply only today?

SL, UT said on 3/Dec/10
I stood next to Mr. Redford at a private party at Salt Lake City's Opera House in 1982. I am/was 5'6.5" on a good day. He was exactly my height. I put his barefoot 1982 height at 5'7".

Mr. R said on 29/Nov/10
RR has lost a bit of height, but was probably close to 5-10 in his prime, but maybe just under. But, he is RARELY seen with out cowboy boots these days, so subtract almost two inches from what he seems.

Bon said on 27/Nov/10
175 cm peak, would be average today, tallish in his time

Anonymous said on 7/Nov/10
I met him in Moscow 22 years ago - he is about 175 cm.

jtm said on 7/Nov/10
i think 5'9.75 at his prime is closer to the truth.

Mr T-Cakes said on 20/May/09
The information was very interesting; thanks Antonio. However I can't help but think loss of height in old age may be more strongly dependant on the individual: of course it's probably an inevitability with extreme old age, but I had a grandfather who was about 5ft 11 who didn't seem to shrink:Redford, like Beatty, always seem to be the height they were.

Antonio said on 19/May/09
Height shrinkage with age is a scientific fact. Height loss studies vary in amount lost, but all reliable scources acknowledge it.

Click Here
Click Here
Click Here

Mr T-Cakes said on 19/May/09
isn't Redford as tall as Paul Newman in Butch&Sundance? Who is meant to be 5ft9, apparently. Still I do think it is a myth that people shrink with old age:Redford's always looked a respectable height, and yes, Stallone actually looks taller in his old age: compare the latter's height to that of Burt Young in Rocky Balboa, then look at them both in Rocky 4, where the height difference is barely perceptible.

RisingForce said on 7/Apr/09
Redford actually use to claim 6 ft back in the 70's.

To begin with, we put the question to Redford

east meets west said on 4/Apr/09
Yes, I am sure that ronniet and bootboy are correct. My mother, who was 5'5" at the time, met him in New York in the mid 1970's and he was barely taller than her. She wasn't wearing high heels. She estimated that he was probably about 5'7".

RisingForce said on 4/Apr/09
I think the 5'10.5" height he claimed is his morning height and the 5'9.75" that People Magazine had him at in 1980 is his evening height.

It adds up perfectly.

ronniet said on 27/Mar/09
I was walking down the street in Chicago and noticed a guy in shades standing near a movie set. Upon closer look I could tell it was Robert Redford. We made eye contact and I smiled and he gave me a nod, like "Yeah I know you know who I am". I am 5' 8" on a good day and he was NOT taller than me. No way, no how. I remember my immediate reaction was.. .dang he is SHORT.

cerebralcat said on 27/Feb/09
"reply to glen redford is notorious for being difficult.poses inside events.not in the street."

This guy loves the camera, it'comical.But he likes to control the pictures taken of him. I read in a London magazine (Radio times) about the numerous touch-up instructions a photographer has to adhere to.

Glen are you blond? If not, try wearing a blond wig next time to get noticed, you might have more luck getting a picture.

Russ said on 26/Feb/09
I've told this story here before, So, some of you may remember it. Way back in the late 70's, my sister and her husband saw Redford "up close" inside a ski lodge in Utah. My sister's husband, who was legit 5' 11" at the time, stood about 3 feet from Redford. My sister said that Redford was about an inch shorter. This would make Redford about 5' 9" (at most) barefoot. My sister and her husband were both shocked. When they returned from Utah, my sister made a big deal out of it (Redford's height). And so, that is why I remember the topic so well.

bootboy said on 16/Feb/09
redford likes to wear cowboy boots ..that adds 2-3" to his height.. without the boots he's probably 5'7"

Christian said on 13/Feb/09
On this pic Redford and almost 5'11'' Wyclef Jean are about the same height. It is true that Redford is 5'10'' today and had a peakheight of 5'10

RisingForce said on 7/Feb/09
I doubt that, but Pitt could very well be about 5'10" without his lifts.

Brad said on 6/Feb/09
That's THE best photo to judge Redford & Pitt. He owns Damon because Matt is 5' 8".

RisingForce said on 5/Feb/09
Here Redford looks about Brad Pitt's height. Click Here

Pitt looked taller in Spy Game, but Pitt wore big heels in that film.

RisingForce said on 2/Feb/09
I'd say that's true. Charles Bronson never seemed to lose height even into his 70's and Sylvester Stallone is 62 and doesn't seem any shorter now than he did in the 70's and 80's. Chuck Norris is 68 and could be another example.

TELLEM said on 1/Feb/09
so is robert redford proof that NOT ALL MEN SHRINK with old age?

RisingForce said on 1/Feb/09
I've heard of that book Mr. R, what are are some of the more interesting things you read in it?

Mr. R. said on 1/Feb/09
By the way Risingforce, I actually stole the book "The Height of Your Life" by Ralph Keyes from the library. Very interesting book. This is one source for my info on celeb heights. It would be nice for him to do a follow up book.

glenn said on 31/Jan/09
thank you risingforce.you see i speak the truth.that damon/redford photo is amazing! redford looks 6ft!.

RisingForce said on 31/Jan/09
I believe your 5-10.5 estimate 100% though Glenn, even for his current height.

I saw some pictures from the premiere for that movie he did with Tom Cruise. They perfectly illustrated what you saw with posture. He looked 5-9.5 initially with his old man posture next to Cruise's flawless posture, then I realized in the pictures htat standing straight he's still 5-10.5.

glenn said on 30/Jan/09
redford is notorious for being difficult.poses inside events.not in the street.

RisingForce said on 30/Jan/09
I've always wonder why celebrities can't spare half a minute for a picture.

RisingForce said on 30/Jan/09
Rob, if you think he's lost maybe more like 1 cm then why not just give him his peak height for his current height? After all he hasn't been active making movies lately either.

glenn said on 30/Jan/09
geez,he looks huge there.5-9ish with a horrendous old man slouch,no socks,moccasins is what i saw.i then realised if he straightened out,he would hit 5-10.5,no problem.looked at me like i had 3 heads like he usually does when i asked for photo with.or just plain ignores.

RisingForce said on 29/Jan/09
Rob, are you sure Redford has lost height? He still looks the same height to me. Glenn saw him at 5-10.5 just a year ago as well.

Look at this picture of Redford and 5-10 Matt Damon. It's true that redford has cowboy boots and the pavement advantage, but he's still over 2 inches taller than Damon who is closer to the camera.
Click Here

RisingForce said on 20/Jan/09
This early 80's article calls Redford 5'9.75" Click Here

I think he's a solid 5'10.5" though.

RisingForce said on 1/Jan/09
All male actors under 6 feet are candidates for lifts especially stars like Redford but I believe Glenn saw him liftless at 5-10.5.

Maybe he wears lifts sometimes but Redford is a great example of why cruise is 5-8. Cruise with lifts and a slight posture advantage wasn't much shorter than Redford at premieres in 2007.

Brad said on 30/Dec/08
Stealth shoes might be his weapon these days.

RisingForce said on 10/Nov/08
Exactly, it's all about posture. Posture can make a 5-10.5 man look 5-9 easily. The usual 5-8 claims for Redford are typical celebrity height downgrading in the press.

glenn said on 8/Nov/08
well,to the untrained eye he couldve looked 5-9ish when i saw him last,but i noticed he was was crouching.and then i realised this man was 5-10.5.

RisingForce said on 8/Nov/08
If you look at Redford's proportions or compare him to Paul Newman it's obvious he's not 5'8" like some say. I was surprised that Tom Cruise was nearly his height at a few premieres last year. It's interesting that Redford is still 5'10.5" at 72 years old, just shows that many people exaggerate height loss or assume it just because of someones age. That's one thing I agree with Frank2 about, the reason some look like they've lost a lot of height or more than they did is posture. Uusally your posture declines as you get older.

glenn said on 8/Nov/08
interesting to say the least.

RisingForce said on 7/Nov/08
I've always believed he was 5'10.5". Telly always wore shoes with massive heels and probable lifts, maybe that's why Redford at 5'10.5" looked short to him.

Here's the interview where Telly said that
Click Here

Towards the very end of the video.

glenn said on 7/Nov/08
thats interesting telly said that.redford is nailed down forever by me.in thin loafers last xmas he was indeed 5-10.5 when he ignored me as usual.

RisingForce said on 7/Nov/08
I found it interesting that 5'10" Telly Savalas said Redford was short.

ed said on 24/Oct/08
no way Redford is 5.8...

joan said on 7/Oct/08
I saw him in person for 5 hours and he stood right in front of me. He's 5'10 in his dreams. He's more like 5'8 or a drop shorter.
Thats all PR hype with his 5'10 nonsense.

joan said on 7/Oct/08
I saw him in person for 5 hours and stood right in front of him..no way is he 5'10 except in his dreams. He's 5'8 a small guy.

Complex said on 16/Sep/08
Debbie, look at Pitt's heels in Spy Game, they're unbelievable huge! Click Here They looked even bigger in the movie and he wore them throughout the entire movie. Personally I dont think Redford is 5'10.5 but I don't think Pitt is 5'11 either, but barefoot, there wouldn't be that much difference in the two. Re-watch the movie, the battle scene on his b-day in the movie and the scene with Pitt and McCormick when he finds out she was a spy, his heels are intense in those scenes and wore throughout the whole movie!

Debbie said on 16/Sep/08
There is no way that Redford is 5"10.5". If Brad Pitt is listed at 5'11" - watch Spy Game....Redford is much shorter, like 2 inches. Also, good gauge is an old movie I saw again recently - Barefoot in the Park with Jane Fonda in 1967. You've got to probably guess that back in the day, no one wore "lifts". If Jane is 5'6" or 5'7", look at her in scenes in the movie and she is usually wearing 2 inch pumps. When she does, she is virtually eyeball to eyeball with Redford. Redford is more likely 5'9" on a good day.

Mr. R said on 4/Sep/08
Did anyone see the Iconoclast show with Redford and Newman? Redford looked to be a good 2-3 inches on Newman. Newman must have lost a lot of height. I remember the two of them closer in height in The Sting.