Written and directed by Michael Neelsen, String Theory: The Richard Davis Method is a celebration of music. The documentary is specifically about the bass and its most innovative practitioner, the titular Richard Davis. The musician turned his innate understanding of the instrument into a full-blown movement. After years in bands, he founded the Richard Davis Foundation for Young Bassists, which helps get the instrument into the hands of the youth.
Neelsen interviews several of Davis’ students who carry on his legacy by teaching the new generations of bass players. The interviewees are upbeat and cover a variety of subjects. Some go on about how Davis approaches the bass, and others tackle what music means to humans. Current students talk about the inspiration they feel and how music allows them to express themselves.
“…the bass and its most innovative practitioner, the titular Richard Davis.”
String Theory: The Richard Davis Method could use some restructuring. Concepts or events are just mentioned or happen without much introduction, only for a different interviewee to bring them forth in a natural manner. For example, the discussion of the bass being a throwaway instrument for years and years should be brought up much sooner. As it stands, how Davis reinvented its perception — a big part of the man’s lasting legacy — is discussed from the beginning, but what it means is lost on the non-musically inclined until over halfway through the hour runtime.
But such an issue does not diminish the sheer joy emanating off the screen. The director captures Davis in a loving, jubilant way. The interviewees are lively and show their respect and love for Davis and the bass in every sentence. A dad’s exuberance over his daughter’s love of the Richard Davis Bassist Conference is pure wholesomeness. A story about violinists’ competition versus bassists’ conference is an absolute highlight.
String Theory: The Richard Davis Method is an ode to a wonderful man and his lasting, important legacy on the world of music. The interviews are very well done, and while some restructuring would help the narrative flow, there’s no denying the respect Neelsen has for his subject.
"…no denying the respect Neelsen has for his subject."
