It has been quite some time since the public caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 that he would no longer pursue acting, just before the debut of Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, in his absence, his legend has only grown.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Largely, this legend centers on his favored approach to roles. Being an actor who famously immerses himself in the roles he plays – for example, during Lincoln, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg call him “Mr President” throughout the shoot – audiences has grown more fascinated with his process. Did he really send messages to co-star Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat animals he’d killed during The Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand receiving food via spoon for My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public fallen out of love with over-the-top performances?
Now, Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to express his anger regarding how the Method technique is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays to hear all kinds of people gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which I think is meant to imply that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he told 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 a severe discomfort or mental instability. However, in the life of an actor, it must principally be about the internal work.”
A World of Imitators
To be honest, it appears like the actor has come out from seclusion only to discover shocked by the acting community that has developed in his image. 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 spending two days in solitary confinement without food or water (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.
Essentially, we exist in an environment populated by imperfect Day-Lewis impersonators who want nothing more than to demonstrate the extensive degree of dedication they invest in a character. At the shallow end of the pool we have people like Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she spent the entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she became an Italian native for a year and a half in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself into the role of the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” gifts to fellow cast members. These, according to various accounts, included dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and used condoms, although the actor refuted those worst excesses. Then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed in creating a full-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The foremost Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the subject of a critical magazine feature, full of quotes from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll to himself that worries me,” said co-star Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by it (“I recall him causing others to react with exasperation,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘did not plan to retire, really’
There are so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that Austin Butler still speaks like Elvis Presley, years following the movie’s release. Each of these instances, in part, aims to evoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis takes his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Fight
Moreover, while his fightback to critics of the Method might be noble, 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 its potential results, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to just begin producing more films. Surely everyone would support that idea.
