SO subjective? Sure, subjectivity is always part of it, but not as much as you make it seem by using the word "so".
Is that why almost all your designs on your site look moderate to poor, because you refuse to acknowledge the importance of design theories that are often backed up by scientific research? Your comment is just a lame excuse not to get off your butt and study them or should we just get rid of all the art/design schools because they're useless?
Btw, a good designer also recognises what is open to subjectivity, like which weapon he should have used or if there should be Russian or English text in the background or both.
Other things are just a no-brainer; if you extract an image then you should do it properly! If you add shadows, then you should do it properly. If you use highlights, then use them properly (the top bullet has a shadow on both sides and the highlight is wrong, also highlight and shadow issues with the bug).
Other things are more based on design theory. If you add a huge bug, then you need to have a specific reason for it, because with that size it starts competing with the blood and weapon which only confuses the viewer about the thought behind this piece, because two elements start competing with one another and in a piece like this it's important to have only one idea and a focal point that strengthens it.
So whether the bug has to be in there is subjective, but the size most definitely isn't.
If the piece really wants to stand out, then it needs more. Now it's nothing more than a documenting piece or still life, it has no real story or idea that really get the attention of the viewer. On the other hand, a newspaper in the background with a story about an assassination (just one example) gives the piece a whole different weight, but then the bug should most definitely go, at that point it’s not a matter of subjectivity anymore.