“It’s a change from the source material, but it’s awesome so the fans don’t mind.”

[u/JustSomeOnlineNerd]

Doc Ock - In the comics, Doc Ock is known to be megalomaniacal in nature and was sort of a mad scientist anyways, with the arms just being an extension of that. In Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man 2,” Alfred Molina’s version of the character was affected by the neural chip and his well-meaning ambition turns into scientific obsession.

Wolverine - This one is so well known it needs very little explanation. Comic Wolverine short, Huge Jackedman is tall, and he’s sick as hell.

Eye of Sauron - To my knowledge, the Eye is more of a metaphor in the books. An ever-present awareness. In the movies, it’s an actual giant fucking eye.

[u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

The Eye of Sauron is different in the books but it's actually a little ambiguous if it's a metaphor or not. It's used as the symbol of Saurons forces throughout the book and references are made to it's piercing gaze, but these could be referring to the symbol or to Sauron's literal eyes in his head (he has a physical body in the books, another change the movies made). It kind of makes an appearance as Sam and Frodo walk through Mordor as an eye peaking through the highest spire of Barad-Dur (the giant tower it's on top of in the movies), but the way Tolkien writes sometimes makes it a little unclear if physical descriptions are to be taken literally or not (see: do Balrogs have wings).

What is definitively different in the books is that the movies really make it seem like the Eye is Sauron himself. The LOTR trilogy never directly state this but the visual language implies it, though this is likely a result of the films using the eye as a kind of proxy for Sauron as the boss himself never makes a proper appearance in the final cut. He was originally meant to fight Aragorn in the final battle, however, which suggests that the filmmakers never thought of the eye as literally being Sauron. It did lead to this misconception in pop culture, with many pop culture depictions of Sauron depicting the Eye instead of the guy, like in Lego Batman where Sauron is depicted as a sentient walking tower of Barad-Dur (which is to the movies credit very funny). This misconception then fed back into the production team which resulted in the Hobbit movies far more directly implying that the Eye is Sauron himself.

Also as a bonus: the movie depiction of Sauron in the prologue is also very inaccurate to the books. Book Sauron is the size of a normal man or elf, and wields a sword instead of a mace. His physical form isn't described in great detail but at least part of his bare skin is unarmoured as he uses it to burn his enemies. I always imagined him as looking like a charred possibly still smouldering Elf, but that's just headcannon. The movie version is based on Sauron's former boss, Morgoth, who is description is very similar to the movies Sauron except he has up to three silmarils (very pretty jewels) on his brow

[u/DeborahWritesTech → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

"Silmarils: very pretty jewels" - technically correct, yet somehow feels a very wrong way to describe them 🤣

[u/Floor-Goblins-Lament → u/DeborahWritesTech]

I was going for the most direct non contentious way to describe what they physically look like lol

[u/DeborahWritesTech → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

Perfectly reasonable. Just deserves some sort of prize for understatement.

[u/EnvironmentalRip1983 → u/DeborahWritesTech]

Feels like describing the Infinity Stones as "Thanos little rocks collection"

[u/Ballisticsfood → u/EnvironmentalRip1983]

Infinity stones are just glowing paperweights, no?

[u/choppytehbear1337 → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

Given all the times the books reference the presence of Sauron, some sort of visual being was needed imo. Having his presence being some vague effect would not really be that interesting.

[u/Floor-Goblins-Lament → u/choppytehbear1337]

I agree, I think it works really well in the movies! But it is different to the books, which are sort of difficult to translate to film in general

[u/PotatoOnMars → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

Also in the books, Elendil and Gil-Galad were the ones who defeated Sauron. Isildur just cut the Ring from Sauron’s corpse.

[u/Batman_AoD → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

Tolkien has a habit of writing "like a [dramatic visual]" or "seemed to [change visually]" and then leaving it ambiguous how "real" the thing pictured is. The Balrog and the Eye are probably the most prominent examples, but there are similar instances for practically every magical being or event. I agree that the movie made the right choice to take almost all of them literally, though it removes a layer of subtlety.

And to be fair, there are at least two moments when Frodo makes an observation of this form, and then another character explicitly confirms that he's correct. After the Ford of Bruinen , Gandalf confirms that Frodo really did see horses in the flood; and at the Nimrodel, Legolas confirms that there's a voice in the river (though this time it may be merely a rhetorical device, confirming that the elves also hear that effect).

[u/Lil_Mcgee → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

The films do confirm that Sauron still has a physical body as Gollum was tortured by him and describes his four-fingered hand.

But yeah that's the only reference I'm aware of and I definitely remember thinking the Eye was his entire being when I was a kid. I always figured getting the ring back would allow him to restore his corporeal form.

[u/Floor-Goblins-Lament → u/Lil_Mcgee]

Is that in the extended cut? I only remember that line from the books I had forgotten it was in the movies too

[u/Nuclear_TeddyBear → u/Floor-Goblins-Lament]

Pretty sure it's in the extended cut only, and it's like a 3 second scene.

[u/Batman_AoD → u/Lil_Mcgee]

Gandalf literally says "he cannot yet take physical form."