• sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    I…what?

    How else would you define ‘gory’?

    I am genuienly curious, you have a definition of gore…that is not fundamentally based in a human realizing something is very, very wrong with another living being?

    Like… your blood is generally supposed to stay inside you. Blood is generally considered more gory the more of it there is.

        • Y|yukichigai@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Alright. Gore is the inside squishy bits of the body you shouldn’t see: muscles, torn flesh, whatnot. You see someone’s brains or a stump where an appendage was just separated, that’s gore.

          Blood is… well… blood. In context it’s alarming, but ultimately it’s just a bunch of opaque red liquid.

    • ozymandias@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      the blood doesn’t spray everywhere or all over him, but you can tell a lot gushed out quickly and goes out of view of the camera….
      it’s really fast and mostly you notice his shirt moving suddenly

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        So to you, only blood spatter is gory?

        Not actually just watching something like 1/3 to 1/2 his blood exit his body in maybe 3 seconds tops?

        Like if a guy shat out all his intenstines, but … they went off camera, neatly into a bucket… that wouldn’t be gory?

        Again I am just curious about this, different people are disgusted by different things, draw the lines in different ways I guess.