I think he was about 230+ pounds in that picture. Don’t know his height. I would say that’s ‘big’.
And goddam it this thread is the best motivation to eat I have yet discovered. I would say I’m in the ‘works out’ category… just 
even though recently I’ve had a lot of ‘normal’ people comment on my size (avatar is 3 months old, put on about 10-15 pounds since then
[quote]Bambi wrote:
Sorry forgot to add the image the celeb I was talking about is Christian Bale in Batman Begins don’t think he’s ever been heavier than this[/quote]
He’s small
Kinda started working out.
Holy shit…
To settle the debate once and for all, Ronnie Coleman is not skinny.
[quote]jithu wrote:
Holy shit…[/quote]
I respect Arnold, biut that is not “holy shit”. Arnold weighed LESS than 240lbs at about 6’2" on stage. That would possibly be “huge” by today’s standards but not anywhere near the same level as guys like Vic Richards, Ronnie, Cutler or Warren.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jithu wrote:
Holy shit…[/quote]
I respect Arnold, biut that is not “holy shit”. Arnold weighed LESS than 240lbs at about 6’2" on stage. That would possibly be “huge” by today’s standards but not anywhere near the same level as guys like Vic Richards, Ronnie, Cutler or Warren.
[/quote]
I think some of arnolds body parts like his chest and bies are holy shit, but yeah, he just wasn’t big enough overall.
As far as professional actors, I assume you’re referring to starring actors. There are certainly plenty of non-starring roles that have been played by very muscular actors. But I can think of a few well known actors that are at least big. Arnold is the obvious one, but also Stallone and Andrew Bryniarski (Lattimer in The Program).
Crossover talent that could be considered big: LL Cool J, The Rock, Steve Austin, John Cena. Van Damme also comes to mind. Regarding the above picture I’m pretty sure I read that Christian Bale weighed around 190 for Batman Begins. Definitely not “big” but still impressive considering he was around 120 not too long before for his role in the Machinist.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jithu wrote:
Holy shit…[/quote]
I respect Arnold, biut that is not “holy shit”. Arnold weighed LESS than 240lbs at about 6’2" on stage. That would possibly be “huge” by today’s standards but not anywhere near the same level as guys like Vic Richards, Ronnie, Cutler or Warren.
[/quote]
I agree with this, but I also think that it is hard to look at and classify the top bodybuilders of Arnold’s era if we are going by our determined standards. None of them would even crack the holy shit and most would be huge, heavyweight, or even big. For his era, he probably would be holy shit as no one really saw anything like that, same with Ferrigno and Franco.
I think it’s tough to compare era’s.
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jithu wrote:
Holy shit…[/quote]
I respect Arnold, biut that is not “holy shit”. Arnold weighed LESS than 240lbs at about 6’2" on stage. That would possibly be “huge” by today’s standards but not anywhere near the same level as guys like Vic Richards, Ronnie, Cutler or Warren.
[/quote]
I agree with this, but I also think that it is hard to look at and classify the top bodybuilders of Arnold’s era if we are going by our determined standards. None of them would even crack the holy shit and most would be huge, heavyweight, or even big. For his era, he probably would be holy shit as no one really saw anything like that, same with Ferrigno and Franco.
I think it’s tough to compare era’s. [/quote]
It’s not. It is only tough to compare two different bodybuilders from different eras. No one was walking on stage weighing over 240lbs at UNDER 6 feet tall back then. Therefore, we can say that by TODAY’S STANDARDS they were not as developed so under TODAY’S SCALE they would not qualify as “holy shit” big.
We aren’t doing a study of his era alone.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jithu wrote:
Holy shit…[/quote]
I respect Arnold, biut that is not “holy shit”. Arnold weighed LESS than 240lbs at about 6’2" on stage. That would possibly be “huge” by today’s standards but not anywhere near the same level as guys like Vic Richards, Ronnie, Cutler or Warren.
[/quote]
I agree with this, but I also think that it is hard to look at and classify the top bodybuilders of Arnold’s era if we are going by our determined standards. None of them would even crack the holy shit and most would be huge, heavyweight, or even big. For his era, he probably would be holy shit as no one really saw anything like that, same with Ferrigno and Franco.
I think it’s tough to compare era’s. [/quote]
It’s not. It is only tough to compare two different bodybuilders from different eras. No one was walking on stage weighing over 240lbs at UNDER 6 feet tall back then. Therefore, we can say that by TODAY’S STANDARDS they were not as developed so under TODAY’S SCALE they would not qualify as “holy shit” big.
We aren’t doing a study of his era alone.[/quote]
You basically just reiterated what I said. By today’s scale, he would not quality as holy shit big. But, at the same time, he would qualify as holy shit big in his era by his era’s standards. That’s all I was saying.
[quote]ericcartman wrote:
As far as professional actors, I assume you’re referring to starring actors. There are certainly plenty of non-starring roles that have been played by very muscular actors. But I can think of a few well known actors that are at least big. Arnold is the obvious one, but also Stallone and Andrew Bryniarski (Lattimer in The Program).
Crossover talent that could be considered big: LL Cool J, The Rock, Steve Austin, John Cena. Van Damme also comes to mind. Regarding the above picture I’m pretty sure I read that Christian Bale weighed around 190 for Batman Begins. Definitely not “big” but still impressive considering he was around 120 not too long before for his role in the Machinist.[/quote]
Bale was closer to 220lbs in that movie. He tried to match the “comic book” physical stats of that character.
As far as built actors, no one beats Michael Clarke Duncan. He was near 340lbs in that Dare Devil movie even though he is back to under 280 now.
[quote]EvanX wrote:
Zac Efron= Skinny[/quote]
But gets laid more than any of the others.
Michael Clarke Duncan is a beast.
eras are different each other LOL
in his era Arnold was the one of top (otherwise why he won so many MOs??), for his era he was surely “holy-shit(ish)” but a name come in my mind , The Myth (Oliva).
he was “holy-shit 110%”; small skull,tiny waist and big as hell (and looked even bigger because of his precious frame!).
compared to their era they were at top,huge, for today standards heavyweights?.
(pls, don’t start a flame DECA vs SOMATONORM 
LOL
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:
Huge:
Dr. Clay Hyght when he competed
[/quote]
No.
Huge is way bigger than that. He looks like a lightweight to light heavy in that pic. I would possibly classify that as “heavy weight” but “HUGE” is reserved for the guys that start getting “holy shit, how big are you trying to get” on a regular basis.[/quote]
He’s actually very big for a natural bodybuilder.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]EvanX wrote:
Zac Efron= Skinny[/quote]
But gets laid more than any of the others. [/quote]
???
if he is natural is very big hands down.
Yes I forgot Michael Clarke Duncan. Enormous. Also, the guy who played Debo (sp?) in Friday.
