It has been quite some time since the public saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 that he would no longer work as an actor, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. Yet, in his absence, his reputation expanded further.
The Mythos Surrounding His Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his favored style of working. As someone who famously disappears into the roles he plays – for example, during the Lincoln biopic, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” throughout the shoot – audiences has grown more fascinated with how he works. Did he actually sent messages to co-star Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted during Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis is back in the limelight, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. And he is taking this chance to express his frustration regarding how method acting is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed these days to hear various individuals gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems suggests that someone is behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he told a major publication. “People tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and these elements always seem to involve some form of self-punishment or an experience that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or mental instability. But of course, in the career for a performer, it has to principally be about the internal work.”
A World Full of Followers
Frankly, this sounds as if Day-Lewis has emerged from his retreat only to discover aghast at the world that has been created mirroring his methods. When you are regarded as 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 spending 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 your hero.
In other words, we exist in a landscape full of half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who want nothing more than to show the world the sheer amount of dedication they invest in their roles. On the milder side of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she spent the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she transformed into functionally Italian over 18 months in preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who decided to deeply embed himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “horrifying” presents to his castmates. These, according to various accounts, included dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and used condoms, although Leto denied those worst excesses. Then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into 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 Method Practitioners
The foremost Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the subject of a critical New Yorker profile, full of quotes from people who were worried about his conduct (“The toll to himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by his actions (“I recall [him] making others to react with exasperation,” said an anonymous cast member).
The actor claims he ‘never intended to retire, truly’
There are numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that actor Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. All of this, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
Moreover, while his fightback against method detractors could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, let alone their behaviour. Perhaps if he wants to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to show them what it can achieve, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to simply begin producing additional movies. Surely we could all support that idea.
