It has been a long while since the public saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 declaring he would cease to pursue acting, just before the debut of The Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, in his absence, his reputation has only grown.
The Legend of His Method
Largely, this legend revolves around his favored approach to roles. As someone who famously disappears into the roles he plays – for instance, during the Lincoln biopic, reportedly asked the director call him “Mr. President” throughout the shoot – audiences has grown increasingly obsessed with his process. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Did he consumed solely animals he’d killed for Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Currently, Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. He is taking this chance to vocalise his frustration regarding how method acting is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed these days to hear all kinds of people gobbling off and using phrases like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems is meant to imply that someone is acting insane in a drastic way,” he stated to a major publication. “Everyone often concentrate on the less important details of the work, and those details typically include some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that causes extreme unease or psychological strain. But of course, in the career for a performer, it has to mainly focus on the internal work.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, it appears as if the actor has emerged from his retreat only to discover aghast at the world that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered one of the greatest actors in history, and your approach involves headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in 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 other actors will attempt to emulate that example by imitating your hero.
Essentially, we exist in a landscape populated by imperfect Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to demonstrate the sheer amount of dedication they invest in a character. On the milder side of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to earn an Academy Award for House of Gucci that she spent the entire promotion trying to convince everyone that she transformed into functionally Italian for a year and a half as preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “disturbing” gifts to his castmates. These items, according to various accounts, range from dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and used condoms, though the actor refuted the most extreme claims. And then, naturally, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed to get a full-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for everyone around him.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The foremost practitioner of the Method currently would appear to be Jeremy Strong (formerly an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the basis of a derisive magazine feature, full of quotes from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll to himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I remember him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” said an anonymous cast member).
The actor claims he ‘did not plan to stop acting, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in a dead animal for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that actor Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, three years after the movie’s release. Each of these instances, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, let alone their behaviour. Maybe if he wishes to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing more films. Surely we could all support that idea.
