It’s been quite some time since the public caught a glimpse of the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. After he statement in 2017 declaring he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. Yet, in his absence, his reputation has only grown.
The Mythos of His Method
Largely, this reputation revolves around his favored approach to roles. Being an actor who famously disappears into his characters – for instance, during Lincoln, reportedly asked the director call him “Mr. President” for the entire production – audiences has become more fascinated with how he works. Did he actually sent texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we fallen out of love with over-the-top performances?
Currently, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. And he is taking this chance to express his frustration at how the Method technique is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed these days to hear various individuals gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which I think suggests that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he told a major publication. “Everyone tends to focus on superficial details of the work, and those details typically include some sort of self-punishment or a situation that causes extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the career of an actor, it must principally be about the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
To be honest, this sounds as if the actor has emerged from seclusion only to discover aghast at the world that has been created mirroring his methods. If you’re widely considered one of the greatest actors to ever work, and your process includes headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in isolation without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will attempt to emulate that example by trying to mimic their idol.
Essentially, we now live in an environment populated by half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the sheer amount of dedication they put into their roles. At the shallow end of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she dedicated the whole campaign attempting to persuade people that she transformed into functionally Italian over 18 months as preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself in the character as 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 intimate objects and personal hygiene products, though the actor refuted the most extreme claims. And then, naturally, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded to get a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him making life to the utmost for everyone around him.
The Modern Method Practitioners
The foremost Method Guy at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (formerly Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose process during Succession was so laboriously intensive that it became the basis of a critical New Yorker profile, including statements from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll to himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I recall [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” said an anonymous cast member).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘never intended to stop acting, really’
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 Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, years following that film came out. All of this, to some extent, is meant to invoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis takes his craft.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
And, while his fightback to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, not to mention their practices. 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 additional movies. Certainly we could all get behind that.
