It has been quite some time since anyone caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. After he statement in 2017 declaring he would no longer work as an actor, prior to the release of The Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. However, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Primarily, this legend revolves around his favored approach to roles. Being an actor known for disappears into his characters – for example, during the Lincoln biopic, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has grown increasingly obsessed with his process. Is it true he really send messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat animals he’d killed for Last of the Mohicans? And 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 has returned to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, promoting his latest movie Anemone. And he is taking this chance to express his anger regarding how method acting is viewed. “I’m a little cross nowadays when I hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which I think is meant to imply that someone is acting insane in a drastic way,” he told a major publication. “People often concentrate on the less important aspects of acting, and these elements typically include some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that causes a severe discomfort or psychological strain. But of course, in the career of an actor, it must mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
A World Full of Followers
Frankly, this sounds like the actor has come out from his retreat only to discover aghast at the world that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered one of the greatest actors in history, and your approach includes striking a prop until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in solitary confinement deprived of sustenance (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will want to fill that vacuum by imitating their idol.
Essentially, we now live in a landscape populated by imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who want nothing more than to demonstrate the sheer amount of effort they invest in their roles. At the shallow end 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 spent the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she transformed into functionally Italian for a year and a half as preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself in the character of the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to his castmates. These, according to various accounts, range from deceased animals to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, though Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed to get a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The foremost practitioner of the Method at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the basis of a critical New Yorker profile, full of quotes from individuals who were either concerned for his behaviour (“The toll on himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I remember [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis claims he ‘never intended to retire, really’
There are so many other examples. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year 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 in which Day-Lewis takes his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Fight
And, while his fightback against method detractors could be commendable, 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 simply start making more films. Certainly everyone would support that idea.
