It’s been quite some time since anyone saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his announcement in 2017 that he would no longer pursue acting, just before the release of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. Yet, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
The Legend Surrounding His Method
Primarily, this reputation revolves around his favored style of working. As someone who famously immerses himself in the roles he plays – for instance, during Lincoln, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg call him “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has grown increasingly obsessed with his process. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?
Now, Day-Lewis is back in the limelight, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. And he is taking this chance to vocalise his frustration at how method acting is viewed. “I’m a little cross these days when I hear various individuals gobbling off and saying things like ‘gone full 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 details of the work, and those details typically include some form of self-flagellation or an experience that causes a severe discomfort or mental instability. But of course, in the career for a performer, it has to mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
An Industry of Imitators
To be honest, it appears as if Day-Lewis has come out from his retreat and found himself shocked by the acting community that has developed mirroring his methods. If you’re regarded as among the best actors to ever work, and your process involves headbutting a dummy to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or spending 48 hours in solitary confinement deprived of sustenance (during In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will want to fill that vacuum by imitating your hero.
In other words, we exist in an environment full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of effort they invest in their roles. At the shallow end of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she dedicated the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she became functionally Italian over 18 months in preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to his castmates. These, depending on who you ask, range from dead pigs and rats to anal beads and used condoms, though the actor refuted those worst excesses. 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 full-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life as impossible as he could for everyone around him.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The main practitioner of the Method currently would appear to be Jeremy Strong (formerly an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the subject of a derisive magazine feature, full of quotes from individuals who were either concerned about his conduct (“The toll on himself that worries me,” said co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember [him] making everyone else to react with exasperation,” said an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside an animal carcass during The Revenant. It’s quite possible that actor Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, three years after the movie’s release. All of this, to some extent, aims to evoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis takes his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to alter perceptions, let alone their behaviour. Perhaps if he wants to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing additional movies. Certainly we could all support that idea.
