It’s been a long while since anyone saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his announcement in 2017 declaring he would cease to pursue acting, just before the release of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, in his absence, his reputation has only grown.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his favored style of working. Being an actor 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 grown more fascinated with how he works. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand being spoon-fed for My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we lost interest with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis is back to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to vocalise his frustration at how method acting is viewed. “I’m a little cross nowadays when I hear all kinds of people gobbling off and saying things like ‘gone full method’, which seems suggests that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he told a major publication. “People tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and those details always seem to involve some form of self-punishment or a situation that causes extreme unease or psychological strain. But of course, in the life of an actor, it must principally be about the inner transformation.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, it appears like Day-Lewis has emerged from his retreat only to discover shocked by the acting community that has been created in his image. When you are widely considered one of the greatest actors in history, and your process involves headbutting a dummy to the point of injury (in Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in isolation without food or water (during In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will attempt to fill that vacuum by imitating their idol.
Essentially, we now live in an environment populated by half-cocked Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of effort they invest in 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 whole campaign attempting to persuade people that she transformed into an Italian native for a year and a half in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself into the role as the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” gifts to his castmates. These, depending on who you ask, range from deceased animals to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, though Leto denied the most extreme claims. Then, naturally, there is Jim Carrey, who went so deep as Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that they succeeded to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him making life to the utmost for his colleagues.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The foremost Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose approach during Succession was so laboriously intensive that it formed the subject of a derisive New Yorker profile, full of quotes from people who were either concerned about his conduct (“It’s the cost to himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I remember [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” stated an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘did not plan to retire, truly’
There are numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. All of this, in part, is meant to invoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging 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 what method acting is, or to show them what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to just begin producing more films. Certainly everyone would support that idea.
