It’s been a long while since anyone saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. After he statement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Largely, this legend centers on his favored approach to roles. As someone known for disappears into his characters – for example, while filming Lincoln, reportedly asked the director call him “Mr. President” for the entire production – the world has become increasingly obsessed with his process. Did he really send messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Did he consumed solely game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he insist on being spoon-fed for My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we fallen out of love with over-the-top performances?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. And he is taking this chance to vocalise his anger regarding how method acting is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays when I hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems suggests that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he told a major publication. “Everyone tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and these elements typically include some form of self-flagellation or a situation that causes extreme unease or mental instability. But of course, in the career of an actor, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, it appears like the actor has emerged from his retreat only to discover aghast at the acting community that has been created mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered among the best performers to ever work, and your approach includes headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in solitary confinement without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will attempt to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic your hero.
In other words, we now live in an environment full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of dedication they put into a character. On the milder side of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion trying to convince everyone that she transformed into functionally Italian over 18 months as preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself into the role as the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” gifts to his castmates. These, according to various accounts, included dead pigs and rats to anal beads and personal hygiene products, although the actor refuted those worst excesses. And then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that they succeeded to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
Contemporary Followers of the Method
The main practitioner of the Method at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose process during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the subject of a derisive magazine feature, full of quotes from individuals who were worried about his conduct (“It’s the cost to himself concerns me,” said co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember him causing others to react with exasperation,” stated an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘did not plan to stop acting, really’
There are numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal for The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. All of this, in part, is meant to invoke the seriousness in which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
Moreover, while his fightback against method detractors might be noble, a short publicity tour may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, let alone their practices. Perhaps if he wishes to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate its potential results, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing additional movies. Surely everyone would support that idea.
