Actors: Good Things Come In Small Packages?

The truth is, I actually haven't seen a movie in weeks. I've been too busy watching hockey. With all this hot controversy about head shots in hockey,  I had a conversation with my father about Zdeno Chara. That of course lead to a talk about his mutant height (6'9 without skates...!!!).

I imagine he's letting out a guttural, mutant-like cry.

 The conversation quickly turned to people on the opposite end of the height spectrum. My father posed a rather peculiar question... "Why are actors so short?" I found this question to be completely ridiculous (my father's definition of short is anything under 6feet- I beg to differ). But he did make a bit of a case... lots of very successful actors are in fact under 6feet. 

Tom Cruise, who is 5'7 (and I'll admit, not particularly tall for a dude) has an estimated wealth of $250million dollars. 

Johnny Depp, who is 5'10 (which is in my opinion an ideal height), makes about 75 million a movie. 

Ben Stiller, who is 5'8, made about 53million for Night At The Museum.

The list continues with actors who stand under 6ft, including Adam Sandler, Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, Daniel Radcliffe, Robert Downey JR, Brad Pitt, Russell Crowe and George Clooney. They all make approximately over 19million dollars per movie. 

One of my favorite actors, Tim Roth, who happens to posses a wealth of talent, stands at 5'7. The list of "short actors" continues... so the question is raised: Do great things come in small packages? Do shorter actors posses more talent than taller ones? I highly doubt this. But it makes an interesting investigation. 

George Clooney: wealthy, talented and attractive!

 El Capitain OUT! 

PS: Don't be shy, feel free to leave a comment below! :) 

What do YOU think?