It’s been a long while since anyone saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 that he would no longer pursue acting, just before the release of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos Surrounding His Acting Method
Primarily, this reputation centers on his favored approach to roles. Being an actor who famously disappears into the roles he plays – for example, while filming Lincoln, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” throughout the shoot – audiences has become increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he really send messages to co-star Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Did he only eat game he hunted during Last of the Mohicans? And did he insist on receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is taking this chance to vocalise his frustration regarding how the Method technique is perceived. “I’m a little cross nowadays to hear all kinds of people talking carelessly and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems suggests that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to the New York Times. “Everyone tends to focus on the less important aspects of acting, and these elements typically include some sort of self-flagellation or an experience that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or mental instability. But of course, in the life of an actor, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
An Industry Full of Followers
Frankly, it appears as if the actor has come out from his retreat only to discover aghast at the world that has been created in his image. When you are regarded as among the best performers to ever work, and your process involves striking a prop to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in isolation without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will attempt to fill that vacuum by imitating your hero.
In other words, we now live in an environment full of imperfect Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of dedication 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 with House of Gucci that she spent the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she became an Italian native over 18 months in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who decided to immerse himself in the character of the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to his castmates. These items, depending on who you ask, included deceased animals to anal beads and used condoms, though Leto denied those worst excesses. Then, naturally, we have Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded to get a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him causing difficulties as impossible as he could for everyone around him.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The foremost practitioner of the Method at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the subject of a derisive New Yorker profile, full of quotes from individuals who were either concerned about his conduct (“The toll on himself that worries me,” said co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I recall him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal for The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that actor Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, three years after the movie’s release. All of this, in part, aims to evoke the seriousness in which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, while his fightback against method detractors could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to alter perceptions, not to mention their behaviour. Perhaps if he wishes to remind people the true essence of the Method, or to show them what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to just begin producing more films. Surely everyone would get behind that.
