Author Topic: Terminator 5 - Arnold busting his arse for it (Read 16427 times)

hench · « **Reply #75 on:** April 04, 2014, 08:41:02 AM »

there are more pics of then more this height next to each other. Notice in the fullbody pic jim is higher up on a sloped pavement.
Arnie was easily near 6'2" if he was shorter that makes everyone at the 80 o literally a dwarf.

Quote from: ARNIE1947 on April 04, 2014, 08:31:46 AM

Alucard · « **Reply #76 on:** April 04, 2014, 09:11:38 AM »

Quote from: Dr.Mabuse on April 04, 2014, 07:57:39 AM

One thing I've noticed is that many people from North American seem to equate 6 foot with being 180cm (instead of the generally accepted 183cm, where an inch is 2.54 cm.)

I recall reading many years ago in an Australia newspaper that Arnold was 184cm tall - that explains the 6 foot 1 and a half business.

Of course, put him next to a legit 6'2" (188cm) person (like Jim Caviezel) and you know the truth...

Didn't know this actually... Me before saying that Arnold was 6' max peak, i meant 182-183cm, not 180cm only, this to be clear without misunderstanding... I will go as far as saying that Caviziel today is around 6'1, both with dress shoes, hard to tell who has more heels...

Quickerblade · « **Reply #77 on:** April 05, 2014, 05:18:41 AM »

I call Flop on Terminator 5.
Teens and people under 24 will avoid, you can see how Stallone trying to promote this flims at comic con in New York, he knows these nerds can add to box office sales. will predict are 1 week bomb, the overacting like sly does in Expendables 2 with his motivational dialogue is embarrassing.

If i'm wrong, lets debate.

Vince B · « **Reply #78 on:** April 05, 2014, 05:46:52 AM »

Quote from: Alucard on April 04, 2014, 04:34:21 AM

Mr Basile, i really want to believe you, but documenting Arnold's career from his early bodybuiding years, i have too many evidences that are pointing to Arnold being 6' max peak height... How do you explain that he's lucky if he can wake up at more than 5'10 today? He looks really average today, even with magic shoes, had he some sort of surgeries or injuries on his back or spine that we doesn't know about? Another evidence is his contest weight, how can a real 6'2-6'1.5 can look as thick and huge like him at the 1974 Olympia and "only" be 237lbs? It make no sense to me...

Unbelievable. Go ask Arnold. Mits was there as were Paul Graham and Bob Bruce. That is what the height gauge said and Arnold didn't dispute it. Trying to accurately gauge height from photos is guesswork and prone to errors. I never exaggerate things like measurements. I measured Arnold's arms at 21 1/2 in October 1968.

Natural Man · « **Reply #79 on:** April 05, 2014, 06:32:55 AM »

Quote from: TrueGrit on March 30, 2014, 08:31:31 PM

denise richard gained weight

anhold looking younger than ever, apparently kids dont care too much about him being unfaithful to their mother.

FitnessFrenzy · « **Reply #80 on:** April 05, 2014, 06:38:37 AM »

Quote from: Vince Basile on April 04, 2014, 12:02:54 AM

Here we go again. I am the only person known to have actually measured Arnold's height in front of witnesses. That was in Mits Gym in Honolulu early in 1969. He said he was 6-2 but the height guage on Mit's scale read 6' -1 1/2". I remember that he stood as tall as possible for the measurement as did everyone else that evening. Everyone I measured was 1/2" shorter than claimed!! It is possible that Arnold was close to 6-2 first thing in the morning.

I am 5' 9 1/2" and Sergio is slightly taller than me so at least 5-10. I picked him up from his hotel in Sydney in 1982 and in his boots he was over 6 feet. You should have seen him. Tight singlet, tight trousers and the biggest muscles to ever walk downtown in Sydney. He was at my gym and also at my home for a party in his honour.

Natural Man · « **Reply #81 on:** April 05, 2014, 06:39:47 AM »

Quote from: Vince Basile on April 05, 2014, 05:46:52 AM

Unbelievable. Go ask Arnold. Mits was there as were Paul Graham and Bob Bruce. That is what the height gauge said and Arnold didn't dispute it. Trying to accurately gauge height from photos is guesswork and prone to errors. I never exaggerate things like measurements. I measured Arnold's arms at 21 1/2 in October 1968.

You are the definition of a nobody who never was.

Papper · « **Reply #82 on:** April 05, 2014, 07:02:35 AM »

Quote from: uberman on April 05, 2014, 06:32:55 AM

denise richard gained weight

anhold looking younger than ever, apparently kids dont care too much about him being unfaithful to their mother.

Naw It's Arnold we're talking about.

Gladly accepting his apologies in form of money

Alucard · « **Reply #83 on:** April 05, 2014, 08:09:19 AM »

Quote from: Vince Basile on April 05, 2014, 05:46:52 AM

Unbelievable. Go ask Arnold. Mits was there as were Paul Graham and Bob Bruce. That is what the height gauge said and Arnold didn't dispute it. Trying to accurately gauge height from photos is guesswork and prone to errors. I never exaggerate things like measurements. I measured Arnold's arms at 21 1/2 in October 1968.

Fair enough mr. Basile, still i keep my opinion on 6' (182-183cm) for Arnold's peak... Arms measurement seems also a bit fanciful, was Arnold in massive offseason mode very fat? Coleman had that 21.5 measurement in 2004, at around 300lbs offseason, how can Arnold came close to that without today's drugs/oil protocols, even being taller than 5'10 max Coleman? In my opinion both him and Oliva had pretty close measurements at around 20 inches, at their biggest...

Vince B · « **Reply #84 on:** April 05, 2014, 08:45:40 AM »

Confucius said don't talk about feats of strength, unnatural occurrences, and religion. I have to add measurements. Believe what you want because no one here is going to change his mind.

muscleman-2013 · « **Reply #85 on:** April 05, 2014, 08:49:52 AM »

Quote from: uberman on April 05, 2014, 06:32:55 AM

denise richard gained weight

anhold looking younger than ever, apparently kids dont care too much about him being unfaithful to their mother.

Fuck off and die ~~true adonis~~ uberdouch.

Alucard · « **Reply #86 on:** April 05, 2014, 08:58:08 AM »

Quote from: Vince Basile on April 05, 2014, 08:45:40 AM

Confucius said don't talk about feats of strength, unnatural occurrences, and religion. I have to add measurements. Believe what you want because no one here is going to change his mind.

Nice, that's what i usually said also... Mr. Basile, can i ask if you measured Freakenstein's arms in late 80s-early 90s? How tall was he also, around 6', 6'1 maybe?

hench · « **Reply #87 on:** June 06, 2014, 01:48:58 AM »

new pics from the set of arnold in costume

ESFitness · « **Reply #88 on:** June 06, 2014, 01:53:43 AM »

Quote from: hench on March 30, 2014, 09:37:15 AM

Screw cgi shitfest noah, sabotage should be the real winner, arnolds the real deal.
He's still got t5 up his sleeve

fucker's wearing Stallone's 60mm Panerai.

looks to have stolen Sly's gh as well... arnie's more vascular that I ever remember seeing him.

visualizeperfection · « **Reply #89 on:** June 06, 2014, 02:01:28 AM »

Quote from: ESFitness on June 06, 2014, 01:53:43 AM

fucker's wearing Stallone's 60mm Panerai. looks to have stolen Sly's gh as well... arnie's more vascular that I ever remember seeing him.

ugh disgusting watch.

Ill keep my 44mm panerai and my dignity.

did his hair regrow?

ESFitness · « **Reply #90 on:** June 06, 2014, 02:25:12 AM »

Quote from: visualizeperfection on June 06, 2014, 02:01:28 AM

ugh disgusting watch.

Ill keep my 44mm panerai and my dignity.

did his hair regrow?

I did try on a 47mm Radiomir (PAM 021? I dunno) and liked it.. but i'll keep my 44mm Marina.. I need a date window.. only reason I look at my watch is to check the date. lol

my 50mm U-Boat is big enough.. too big.. I can't imagine a 60mm.. even if it was a panerai.

visualizeperfection · « **Reply #91 on:** June 06, 2014, 02:27:07 AM »

Quote from: ESFitness on June 06, 2014, 02:25:12 AM

I did try on a 47mm Radiomir (PAM 021? I dunno) and liked it.. but i'll keep my 44mm Marina.. I need a date window.. only reason I look at my watch is to check the date. lol

my 50mm U-Boat is big enough.. too big.. I can't imagine a 60mm.. even if it was a panerai.

I have a 44 marina 005. Essentially a 111 with subtle differences, including 200 bucks, lol.

I posted a pic of it earlier, along side my 42mm planet ocean.

ESFitness · « **Reply #92 on:** June 06, 2014, 02:41:03 AM »

Quote from: visualizeperfection on June 06, 2014, 02:27:07 AM

I have a 44 marina 005. Essentially a 111 with subtle differences, including 200 bucks, lol.

I posted a pic of it earlier, along side my 42mm planet ocean.

I wanted the 45mm PO not long ago.

I think Chopard came out with a 45mm model recently.. could be a re-release. I dunno.. I'm not usually a fan, but the one I saw was nice.. it'd be a toss-up between that and the 45mm PO, except for the price, you cant beat the PO. decisions.... $:-\$

visualizeperfection · « **Reply #93 on:** June 06, 2014, 02:44:16 AM »

Quote from: ESFitness on June 06, 2014, 02:41:03 AM

I wanted the 45mm PO not long ago.

I think Chopard came out with a 45mm model recently.. could be a re-release. I dunno.. I'm not usually a fan, but the one I saw was nice.. it'd be a toss-up between that and the 45mm PO, except for the price, you cant beat the PO. decisions.... $:-\$

I dont like a diver being that big. Im happy with 42. Why do you want a larger watch?

ESFitness · « **Reply #94 on:** June 06, 2014, 03:28:31 AM »

Quote from: visualizeperfection on June 06, 2014, 02:44:16 AM

I dont like a diver being that big. Im happy with 42. Why do you want a larger watch?

i just got used to the 44. anything smaller doesn't feel right. lol.. fucking GMT feels tiny now and i dunno how i ever worse a day/date back in the day.