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 cease to work as an actor, prior to the release of The Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, in his absence, his reputation has only grown.
The Mythos Surrounding His Acting Method
Primarily, this reputation revolves around his favored style of working. Being an actor who famously immerses himself in his characters – for example, during Lincoln, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” for the entire production – audiences has become increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he consumed solely animals he’d killed during The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Currently, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to express his anger at how method acting is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed these days to hear all kinds of people talking carelessly and saying things like ‘gone full method’, which seems suggests that someone is behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he stated to a major publication. “People often concentrate on the less important aspects of acting, and these elements always seem to involve some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that causes a severe discomfort or psychological strain. However, in the life for a performer, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
A World of Imitators
To be honest, this sounds as if the actor has come out from seclusion only to discover shocked by the world that has been created mirroring his methods. When you are regarded as among the best actors in history, and your approach includes headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (for Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in isolation deprived of sustenance (during In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will want to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic their idol.
In other words, we exist in a landscape full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of effort they put into their roles. On the milder side of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to earn an Academy Award with House of Gucci that she spent the whole campaign 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 decided to immerse himself in the character 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 personal hygiene products, although Leto denied the most extreme claims. Then, naturally, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded to get a feature-length documentary out of B-roll 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 Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach while filming Succession was so laboriously intensive that it became the subject of a critical New Yorker profile, including statements from individuals who were worried about his conduct (“It’s the cost to himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I recall [him] making others to react with exasperation,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor claims he ‘never intended to stop acting, really’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass during The Revenant. It’s quite possible that actor Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, years following that film came out. Each of these instances, in part, is meant to invoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis takes his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method could be commendable, a short publicity tour may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, let alone their practices. 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 start making more films. Surely we could all get behind that.
