That's a fair point and I mention that I do see some of what I say as nit picking.
But the point still stands that what DiCillo insinuates and the facts are a very distant relation.
Of course Bill was familiar with the band. I for one am not saying he wasn't. Simply saying that it was an accident as opposed to 'no accident' according to Tom that the cover was as it was.
Therefore poor narrative.
Bil himself says and I quote.....
" For the cover I did not want to have to deal with the group, it was too difficult.
I talked to them and they agreed on something Fellini-esque a troupe of strolling players idea."
This obviously a consequence of Jim and his put some dogs on the cover comment....it's better than having our fucking faces on it.
It's not a reflection of the music of Strange Days simply a reflection of Morrison and his dissatisfaction of the first cover which gives a completely different spin to the story than told by Tom......which I must point out leans more towards analysis than nit picking.........do you not agree?
Lets look a bit deeper at the section of the film you describe as nit picking.
One of the central planks of DiCillos Morrison is that he was a self centred, attention needing, superficial character who survived on an audience.
This theme appears from the off in WYS with Jim's school letter describing him as self centred.
DiCillo says that it was no accident that Strange Days had the cover it had......but it was indeed an accident and there was a very good reason for that accident.
This self centred, attention seeking singer got rather peeved when he saw the debut LP cover and that he dwarfed the other three and as a result argued against his face being on the second album.
Hence his dogs suggestion.....God spelt backwards .....better than having our fucking faces on it!
Now this was a pretty important moment and told Doors fans something about the singers character but would have completely blown DiCillos fatuous needy Jim Morrison into next month if he had told the true reason for SD having circus performers on the cover. Surely if Jim needed the buzz attention brought him having his face on an album cover would have satisfied that need? But it seems he was not that shallow. But of course DiCillo never reveals an irritating fact like that.
The devil is in the detail and looking a bit deeper can sometimes tell a story that is hidden from view.