>>7583814I think it still counts if what the thing actually is/is from is still not obvious. Minimalist art of some very obscure thing from a work, or even "abstract" art that actually means something to those in the know still accomplishes the same thing. But I do agree that less minimalist ones are better, the absolute best is an actual shot or image from the work itself like pic related. The movie itself isn't obscure but I doubt even most people who've seen it would recognize this. Might come up in image search idk.
>>7582579excellent