Plenty of ethnic Orthodox copied Western painting styles, sometimes a cause for arguments between them and gung-ho converts. Fr. Seraphim (Rose) sided with the ethnics against these "super-correct." I don't like all religious art but I like much of ours that does not belong in the Byzantine Rite. My icon corner is all Byzantine Rite, with nothing particularly post-schism Catholic or Orthodox (three-bar crucifix, old-man Trinity icon from tsarist times, Jesus, Mary, St. Panteleimon, and a group icon card of a few pre-schism worthies).
I think the underlying principle of why there is a hostility to "Western art" was that - at the most, from when statues were introduced in the West, at least, from the Renaissance onward, there is a massive theological shift in the West terms of liturgical art. The purpose of iconography is to serve two purposes - to teach us about the Gospel and the History of the Church and Her Saints, but also, and as important if not even more important, to focus our minds to the World To Come. The whole purpose of the Divine Liturgy is to recreate Heaven, which is why Liturgy is so ornate and beautiful - in addition to preparing the way for the King (who is literally present in every Divine Liturgy).
It's why iconoclasm was condemned as heresy in the Seventh Ecumenical Council.
In terms of symbolism, the icons of the Saints are theologically flat, lack any movement, and seem like they are outside time and space itself. They are ornate and beautiful in almost a Divine Manner loaded with symbolism (the Theotokos probably didn't walk around wearing bright red/maroon robes or bright blue robes - but these colors were symbols of royalty, and from what I read online, these two colors in different regions were the most expensive colors used - which is why in the West, she is predominantly blue, and in the East, she is predominantly red). She also didn't wear Byzantine-empress shoes or have a glowing halo around her head.
They are flat, and they look directly at another saint or at your soul. You'll also see gold as a predominant background color in most Eastern iconography, symbolic of light.
It's why icons are kissed and venerated - they are symbolic of the Saints in Heaven and when we kiss such icons, we believe that we are symbolically kissing the Saints themselves in a Mysterious way. It's why one will see people kissing the feet of Christ.
I recommend reading this article:
http://antiochian.org/content/no-graven-image-icons-and-their-proper-useHowever, statues, being three dimensional intrinsically, already kind of fight against the idea of being "outside time and space" and stagnant, looking into your soul. They also aren't as capable of educating people while maintaining theological soundness, and thus - while I don't believe strictly forbidding, are often seen as inferior.
From the Renaissance onward, there is a HUGE theological change. Two focuses were introduced which still exist to this day - the first of which is a complete abandonment of Heaven and a direct focus of earthly life and materialism, the second of which is the adoration of corpses in art.
In the former category, there is a lot of "movement" captured in Western art. When one looks at a scene of Christ being tortured or the Crucifixion, or the Annunciation, the Saints or Christ is posed in such a way that they are reacting to something - almost like a photograph.
And the shift is away from theological symbolism to being "realistic;" that is, to solely being about the lives of the saints on earth. This kind of theological connection to the Heaven is completely lost, supposed to represent the disconnection from Earth, to a full embracing of Earth. The goal is not representing the Saints in Heaven, but representing memories of them. The prayer focus is lost too - the shift goes to not focusing on repentance and being in Heaven seeing the saints in God, but mere education about how people "felt." Thus, many feel it isn't appropriate to venerate such images.
Compare an Orthodox icon of the Annunciation to a Roman Catholic Painting, and look at the movement and symbolism in both.
https://www.easterngiftshop.com/media/ecom/prodlg/Annunciation%20Full%20Size%20flyer.jpghttp://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/ep/web-large/DT404.jpgIn the latter category, there is a huge adoration of corpses. In a funny manner, the shift went away from representing the "bodyless" saints in Heaven (besides Christ and the Virgin Mary) to a love of the human body. True, the human body is pretty - we are made in the image of God, and we are naturally attracted (due to our fallen nature) to such corpses. However, the use of such art in Liturgy is not only not appropriate due to the previously mentioned problems, but it is also problematic because in Renaissance artwork especially, there is such a focus on the detail and beauty of the corpses that it takes precedent completely in the artwork and the story of the saints. People began creating art that "stirs the passions" so to speak and incites lust, something that cannot be denied (which is why many Protestants poke fun at Renaissance artwork with "naked people in church."), even making images of Christ and saints whose sole focus is to make beautiful the corpse.
It also began introducing many pagan elements into the artwork itself - the most obvious example is Michaelangelo's "The Last Judgment," and even from the Annunciation painting shown above, the "bodyless" powers / Cherubim are portrayed as a naked Cupid baby. As an "instruction tool" and a "connector to Heaven," some works of art are even blasphemous for Liturgical use - Michaelangelo's "The Last Judgment," despite how pretty it is, is despicable for veneration and sinful.
I'll give some examples.
Orthodox Crucifixion Icon:
http://www.olgachristine.com/icons/OL_Crucifixion.jpgRenaissance Painting:
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/e1/4e/7f/e14e7fb56a5f04a97ee9274e62ea9a58--pictures-of-jesus-classical-art.jpgLast Judgment Icon:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/91/79/bc/9179bcf70cb989df19fb98823dff731b.jpgPainting:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Last_Judgement_%28Michelangelo%29.jpg/1200px-Last_Judgement_%28Michelangelo%29.jpgTheotokos praying icon:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1136/4188/products/1229__40537.1372976772.1000.1200_large.jpeg?v=1456618018Painting:
https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/1/madonna-at-prayer-il-sassoferrato.jpgTheotokos and Child Icon:
https://ryanphunter.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/theotokos-11.jpgPainting:
http://italianrenaissanceresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/RP_2311-1.jpgThus, there is a hesitancy, considering Roman "development," to just translate over modern Roman Catholic art into Orthodox Liturgy. If we had an endless amount of 13th / 12th century and before art that was widely available and didn't focus so much on three dimensional characteristics, and covered saints and ideas that are Eastern Orthodox so easily, it wouldn't be a problem - but hey, a Liturgically proper substitute is better than a blasphemous one.
For these reasons, contemporary Western art isn't really acceptable.
You might see it as "snobbish," but Traditions are precious and so is Theology.
I didn't really myself comprehend the importance and symbolism of iconography until I saw an icon of Yevgeny Rodionov.
He was a Russian soldier who was killed after some Islamic militants wanted him to remove his Cross, which he refused to do - and he is venerated by many in Russia as a martyr (although the Orthodox Church is hesitant to canonize him - you know, war and stuff).
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e6/Yevgeny_Rodionov.gifhttps://i.pinimg.com/736x/c9/bf/f7/c9bff717bd9aa0a2c1b2c35cd3752965--russian-icons-russian-orthodox.jpgThis icon still gives me goosebumps.