It’s been quite some time since anyone saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, just before the release of The Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. Yet, in his absence, his reputation has only grown.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Largely, this legend revolves around his favored style of working. As someone who famously disappears into his characters – for instance, while filming Lincoln, he had Steven Spielberg call him “Mr. President” throughout the shoot – the world has grown more fascinated with how he works. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat animals he’d killed for Last of the Mohicans? Did he insist on being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Day-Lewis is back to public attention, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to vocalise his frustration regarding how the Method technique is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays to hear all kinds of people talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which I think suggests that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he stated to a major publication. “Everyone often concentrate on the less important aspects of acting, and those details always seem to involve some form of self-punishment or an experience that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the life for a performer, it must principally be about the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, this sounds like Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion and found himself shocked by the world that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered among the best actors in history, and your approach involves headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (for Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in solitary confinement without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will attempt to emulate that example by imitating your hero.
Essentially, we now live in a landscape populated by half-cocked Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to demonstrate the sheer amount of effort they put into their roles. At the shallow end of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to earn an Academy Award for House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she became functionally Italian over 18 months as preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself in the character of the Joker (for Suicide Squad) through sending “disturbing” gifts to fellow cast members. These items, according to various accounts, range from deceased animals to intimate objects and used condoms, although the actor refuted the most extreme claims. Then, naturally, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into 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 his colleagues.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The foremost practitioner of the Method at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (formerly an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the subject of a critical magazine feature, full of quotes from individuals who were either concerned about his conduct (“The toll to himself that worries me,” said Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I recall him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” stated an anonymous cast member).
The actor claims he ‘never intended to retire, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside an animal carcass during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that actor Austin Butler still speaks like Elvis Presley, years following that film came out. Each of these instances, to some extent, aims to evoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Fight
Moreover, while his fightback to critics of the Method could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to alter perceptions, not to mention their practices. Maybe if he wishes 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 just begin producing more films. Certainly everyone would support that idea.
