It’s been a long while since the public saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 that he would no longer work as an actor, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. However, during his hiatus, his reputation has only grown.
The Legend Surrounding His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation revolves around his preferred style of working. As someone who famously disappears into his characters – for instance, during the Lincoln biopic, reportedly asked the director address him as “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has become increasingly obsessed with his process. Is it true he really send messages to co-star Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Did he only eat animals he’d killed during The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?
Currently, Daniel Day-Lewis is back in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to vocalise his frustration at how the Method technique is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed these days when I hear all kinds of people gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which I think suggests that someone is acting insane in a drastic way,” he stated to a major publication. “Everyone often concentrate on superficial aspects of acting, and those details typically include some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that causes a severe discomfort or mental instability. But of course, in the career for a performer, it must principally be about the inner transformation.”
An Industry of Imitators
To be honest, it appears like the actor has emerged from seclusion only to discover shocked by the world that has been created in his image. If you’re regarded as among the best actors to ever work, and your approach involves striking a prop to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in solitary confinement without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will attempt to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic their idol.
Essentially, we now live in a landscape full of imperfect Day-Lewis impersonators who want nothing more than to demonstrate the sheer amount of dedication they put into their roles. On the milder side of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion trying to convince everyone that she became functionally Italian over 18 months as preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself in the character as the Joker (for Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to fellow cast members. These items, depending on who you ask, included deceased animals to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, though the actor refuted those worst excesses. Then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who went so deep as Andy Kaufman during 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.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The main Method Guy currently seems to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process during Succession was so laboriously intensive that it formed the subject of a critical magazine feature, full of quotes from people who were worried about his conduct (“The toll on himself concerns me,” said Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by it (“I recall [him] making others roll their eyes,” stated an anonymous cast member).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘never intended to retire, really’
We have numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that Austin Butler continues to talk like Elvis Presley, years following the movie’s release. Each of these instances, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method could be commendable, a short publicity tour may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, let alone their practices. Perhaps if he wants to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate what it can achieve, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to just start making more films. Surely we could all get behind that.
