And genre can also affect this idea of imagery. It would be considered ridiculous to say that a romance movie had a lot of kissing imagery or that a legal drama had a lot of suit imagery.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
But where taboo comes in is that in some cases the mere presence of a thing can be called imagery and the frequency becomes irrelevant. A single shot with a bird in it won't be called bird imagery. But you could get away with talking about the blood imagery of a movie that only has one blood shot.
And again, a person bleeding can be present in the scene and relevant but the blood itself is considered unnecessary to show. Justifiable, since people don't like seeing blood, but it does end up lending it power.
So Tarantino is well known for having a lot of blood in his movies. This reputation implies that he likes blood itself and not just violence that happens to be bloody*. And this could be true because there are probably filmographies just as violent but not as bloody.
Anyway, this is all the stuff that I think about whenever the sex scenes discourse gets brought up. A question that doesn't get asked enough there is why sex and nudity gets placed in the same category as like, blood, piss, and vomit.
Comments