The eye didn't work for me. Putting aside that fact that its existence in the mvoie cannot be support with concrete evidence that it existed in the book, I just plain did not like it. It looked ridiculous, for starters, and for seconds it left audiences not familiar with Tolkien wondering why the Dark Lord, who supposedly could not take physical form, had in fact taken physical form - as a giant, red, electrically charged Eye, no less, perched at the top of a tall tower. It is implausible, confusing and outright silly.<P>But that's just me and my two cents.<P>~Sparrow

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I do think Tolkien literally meant an Eye at the top of Barad-dûr,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Eh, I'm afraid the books say that it's nothing more than a red glow from one of the topermost windows. A powerful glow, but nothing more.

I'm going to sound like a yes-man, but I don't care. I think the Eye was necessary to a certain extent. As Lord of Angmar and Estel have said over and over, the Eye in FotR was well-used. Flashing across the screen, making everyone who was watching for the first time jump. <BR>Barad-dûr was good in the first movie also: partly completed, and you never actually saw the top. This is just my two cents, but I think that the top of the Dark Tower would have been put to much better use as part of Minas Morgul. In fact, with the two prongs, when I saw the TTT poster for the first time, that's what I thought it was. I really wish that PJ and Co. had used the Tower better, flashing it across the screen only occasionally and keeping it for the most part veiled in shadow.<BR>So, to sum up, the Eye of Sauron could have been much better done, and the whole spotlight thing was very, very retarded and should have been much more well-thougt-out, the mosre so because it contradicts the first two movies by adding something completely new.<BR>Actually, I just had a flash of insight or idiocy. Maybe the Dark Tower was a lighthouse for anyone who was on Lake Nurnen? <p>[ 1:32 AM January 15, 2004: Message edited by: Erundil ]