The black eye model postulates a mass-free gravitational depression, but the inverse-square gravitational field mathematically cannot form depressions. The observation that stars orbit Sagittarius A* extremely rapidly--indicating a very large central mass, or, were it mathematically possible, a very steep "gravitational depression"--is extremely good evidence against a black eye model.

You can reinvent gravity to rescue it, possibly, but with ordinary gravity it's completely out. It's as workable as adding even numbers until eventually you hit an odd one. Not gonna happen (in finite time, anyway)!

Or you can change the black eye idea to say that the mass is all there, it's just somehow excluded from the middle (but why?)...as long as you somehow get a lot of mass actually inside the orbit of the closest stars.

There are also galaxies without supermassive black holes, galaxies with two supermassive black holes, and supermassive black holes without galaxies. Pretty weird if they're a collective phenomenon of galaxies.

Finally, your notion of "collective" is poorly defined. Gravity always works collectively: everything pulls on everything. All the stars in NGC5395 pull on each other, and also on all the stars in NGC5394 (the small one). And on us, but we're so far away that all the stars together are irrelevant. Anyway, if you see the spiral of NGC5395 pulled down a little towards NGC5394, that's...exactly...what you'd expect from normal gravity. There's no evidence of any "collective" beyond that.