Featured Image Credit: New Line Cinema
Topics: The Lord Of The Rings, TV And Film
Fans of The Lord of the Rings are used to the image of Sauron in two ways: the big giant eyeball roaming the landscape, and the armour-clad visage from the battle against men.
We’re never really shown exactly what Sauron looks like, because he’s a shape-shifter, and the images we have from Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy last because they’re so menacing.
Sauron is very different in the films, compared to the Amazon TV show.
Advert
However, if you cast your eyes to the Amazon TV show, The Rings of Power, specifically episode one of season two, we get a look at what he really looks like.
Beware, this is a spoiler, so if that bothers you then go watch the show instead.
If you’re still here, that likely means you want to know how Sauron is depicted in the show, when he’s in his ‘true form'.
Essentially, he’s a big mass of weird, worm-like tentacles that seep throughout the land.
Whether you buy into this depiction depends on how deep into the lore you are; Peter Jackson struggled to visually depict Sauron, because he’s a force, or entity, rather than a constant humanoid.
On Reddit, fans explore the characterisation, with one noting, “I was really disturbed following Sauron’s death,” then asked, “When he tries to be reborn having this monstrous mass of tentacles - What is the thought behind it?”
This user wonders why Sauron looks that way, when Gandalf doesn’t, despite them both being Istari.
“The Istari were specifically given the bodies of men to limit their ambitions. Sauron is not limited in that way,” explains HazelCheese.
“I think this is why Galadriel calls him, shapeless and formless,” mentions Common-Feeling-3249.
In the books, Sauron is described as being a shadow moving across Middle-Earth, which is hard to visualise for an audience in TV or Film, so instead creators tend to opt for something scary, or gross.
HazelCheese follows up by summarising, “Sauron turning into a puddle that eventually reforms is a fairly consistent interpretation, IMO.”