It’s been quite some time since anyone saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, just before the debut of The Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos of His Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his preferred approach to roles. As someone who famously disappears into the roles he plays – for instance, during the Lincoln biopic, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” throughout the shoot – audiences has grown increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he actually sent messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he consumed solely game he hunted during The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand being spoon-fed for My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is taking this chance to express his anger regarding how method acting is viewed. “I’m a little cross nowadays to hear various individuals talking carelessly and saying things like ‘gone full method’, which I think is meant to imply that a person’s acting insane in an extreme fashion,” he told a major publication. “Everyone often concentrate on the less important details of the work, and these elements always seem to involve some form of self-punishment or a situation that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or psychological strain. However, in the life for a performer, it has to mainly focus on the internal work.”
A World Full of Followers
To be honest, it appears like the actor has come out 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 actors to ever work, and your process involves striking a prop until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in isolation without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by trying to mimic their idol.
Essentially, we exist in a landscape full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of dedication they put into their roles. On the milder side of the pool we have people like Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to earn an Academy Award for House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she transformed into an Italian native for a year and a half as preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” gifts to his castmates. These, according to various accounts, range from dead pigs and rats to anal beads and personal hygiene products, though Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties as impossible as he could for his colleagues.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The main Method Guy at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (formerly Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the basis of a critical magazine feature, full of quotes from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll to himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by it (“I recall [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘did not plan to retire, truly’
There are so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that Austin Butler continues to talk like Elvis Presley, three years after the movie’s release. Each of these instances, to some extent, aims to evoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Fight
And, while his fightback against method detractors could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, let alone their practices. Maybe if he wants to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to show them its potential results, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing more films. Surely we could all support that idea.
