Was the Cowardly Lion described as walking on his hind legs in the book?
No. The Lion is always pictured as being a regular Lion...large - 'as big as a small
horse.'
There are many, many differences between the book and the movie... as is usual.
Among them, there are no 'ruby shoes'. The shoes were Silver in the book. But Silver was not so dramatic when filmed, so they were changed.
the movie also contains some 'leftover' partial scenes originally intended to be included in full, but cut out. they make no sense standing alone, as there is no 'point of reference'. But they go largely unnoticed.
One, for example, is the scene where they're walking through the forest, with one carrying a large bug-net, and one carrying a large bug-spray apparatus. Not knowing the scene in the book from which this comes, it makes no sense to have them walking around with those two things, for that one brief scene... but then being without them ever afterward.
Another is, have you ever wondered why there is a wicked witch of
the east and west, but only one good witch in the movie? Well, the book has two good witches.. .North and South of course.
There are entire
peoples,
events,
creatures etc. in the book not existent in the movie.
Again we just see a movie can rarely do a book justice... each must be taken on its own merits, and enjoyed for what it is, rather than trying to press it into what it is not.