It’s been a long while since the public caught a glimpse of the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his announcement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, prior to the release of The Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos of His Method
Largely, this reputation revolves around his favored style of working. As someone known for immerses himself in his characters – for instance, while filming the Lincoln biopic, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” for the entire production – audiences has become more fascinated with how he works. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat animals he’d killed during The Last of the Mohicans? Did he insist on receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to vocalise his frustration at how method acting is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays to hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which seems is meant to imply that someone is acting insane in a drastic way,” he stated to a major publication. “People tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and those details always seem to involve some form of self-flagellation or a situation that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the career for a performer, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
To be honest, this sounds as if the actor has emerged from his retreat only to discover aghast at the world that has been created in his image. If you’re widely considered one of the greatest performers to ever work, and your process includes striking a prop until you break your nose (for Gangs of New York) or spending two days in isolation deprived of sustenance (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will attempt to emulate that example by imitating their idol.
In other words, we exist in a landscape full of half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the sheer amount of effort they put into their roles. On the milder side of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to earn an Academy Award with House of Gucci that she dedicated the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she became functionally Italian for a year and a half in preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who decided to immerse himself in the character as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” presents to his castmates. These items, according to various accounts, range from dead pigs and rats to anal beads and personal hygiene products, though the actor refuted the most extreme claims. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded in creating a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life as impossible as he could for everyone around him.
Contemporary Followers of the Method
The foremost practitioner of the Method currently would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process during Succession was so laboriously intensive that it became the subject of a critical New Yorker profile, including statements from individuals who were either concerned about his conduct (“It’s the cost to himself concerns me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by his actions (“I remember him causing others roll their eyes,” stated an anonymous cast member).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘did not plan to retire, truly’
We have numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex for six months while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, three years after that film came out. Each of these instances, to some extent, aims to evoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis takes his work.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
And, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a short publicity tour might not be enough to change anyone’s mind, let alone their behaviour. Perhaps if he wishes to remind people the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate its potential results, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply start making more films. Certainly we could all support that idea.
