It has been a long while since the public caught a glimpse of the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. After he statement in 2017 that he would no longer pursue acting, just before the debut of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. However, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos Surrounding His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his favored approach to roles. Being an actor known for disappears into the roles he plays – for instance, during Lincoln, he had the director address him as “Mr. President” throughout the shoot – audiences has become more fascinated with how he works. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Did he only eat game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? Did he insist on receiving food via spoon for My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is using this to express his frustration at how the Method technique is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed these days to hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which I think is meant to imply that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to a major publication. “People often concentrate on the less important aspects of acting, and these elements always seem to involve some form of self-flagellation or an experience that causes extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the life for a performer, it has to mainly focus on the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, it appears as if the actor has emerged from his retreat only to discover shocked by the world that has developed in his image. If you’re regarded as one of the greatest actors to ever work, and your approach includes headbutting a dummy to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or spending 48 hours in isolation deprived of sustenance (during In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by imitating your hero.
In other words, we exist in an environment populated by half-cocked Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of effort they invest in their roles. On the milder side of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to earn an Academy Award for House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion trying to convince everyone that she became an Italian native over 18 months as preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who decided to deeply embed himself into the role of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “horrifying” gifts to fellow cast members. These, according to various accounts, included deceased animals to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, although Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The main practitioner of the Method at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the subject of a critical New Yorker profile, full of quotes from people who were either concerned about his conduct (“The toll to himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by it (“I recall him causing everyone else to react with exasperation,” stated an anonymous cast member).
Daniel Day-Lewis claims he ‘did not plan to retire, really’
There are so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside an animal carcass for The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance 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 with which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Fight
And, although his rebuttal against method detractors might be noble, a short publicity tour might not be enough to alter perceptions, let alone their behaviour. Maybe if he wishes 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 just start making more films. Certainly everyone would support that idea.
