It’s been a long while since the public saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 that he would cease to pursue acting, just before the release of The Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. However, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos Surrounding His Acting Method
Largely, this legend revolves around his preferred style of working. As someone known for immerses himself in the roles he plays – for example, while filming the Lincoln biopic, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has grown more fascinated with his process. Did he really send texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Did he consumed solely animals he’d killed for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand receiving food via spoon for My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?
Currently, Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. He is taking this chance to express his frustration at how method acting is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays when I hear various individuals gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems is meant to imply that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he told the New York Times. “People tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and those details always seem to involve some form of self-flagellation or an experience that causes extreme unease or psychological strain. However, in the career for a performer, it has to principally be about the internal work.”
A World of Imitators
Frankly, it appears as if Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion and found himself aghast at the acting community that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered one of the greatest performers to ever work, and your process involves striking a prop until you break your nose (for Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in solitary confinement deprived of sustenance (during In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will want to emulate that example by imitating their idol.
In other words, we now live in a landscape populated by half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of effort they invest in their roles. At the shallow end of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to earn an Academy Award with House of Gucci that she dedicated 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 deeply embed himself into the role of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to his castmates. These items, depending on who you ask, included dead pigs and rats to anal beads and used condoms, though Leto denied the most extreme claims. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that they succeeded to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him making life as impossible as he could for his colleagues.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The foremost Method Guy at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the subject of a critical New Yorker profile, including statements from people who were worried about his conduct (“The toll to himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I recall him causing others roll their eyes,” said an anonymous cast member).
The actor says he ‘never intended to retire, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in a dead animal for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that actor Austin Butler still speaks like Elvis Presley, three years after the movie’s release. Each of these instances, in part, is meant to invoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, not to mention their behaviour. Perhaps if he wants to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to show them its potential results, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to just start making more films. Surely we could all get behind that.
