It’s been quite some time since anyone saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his announcement in 2017 that he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. However, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
The Legend Surrounding His Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his preferred style of working. As someone who famously immerses himself in his characters – for instance, while filming Lincoln, he had the director call him “Mr President” for the entire production – audiences has grown increasingly obsessed with his process. Is it true he actually sent messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: have we fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. And he is using this to express his frustration at how the Method technique is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays when I hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which seems is meant to imply that a person’s acting insane in an extreme fashion,” he told the New York Times. “Everyone often concentrate on superficial details of the work, and these elements always seem to involve some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that causes extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the life for a performer, it must principally be about the inner transformation.”
An Industry of Imitators
To be honest, this sounds as if the actor has emerged from seclusion and found himself shocked by the world that has been created mirroring his methods. If you’re widely considered among the best actors to ever work, and your process involves headbutting a dummy to the point of injury (in Gangs of New York) or spending two days in isolation without food or water (during 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 Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of dedication they invest in their roles. At the shallow end of this trend we have people like 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 became functionally Italian for a year and a half as preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself in the character as the Joker (for Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” 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. Then, naturally, we have Jim Carrey, who went so deep as Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed to get a full-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life as impossible as he could for everyone around him.
Contemporary Followers of the Method
The main 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 (“It’s the cost on himself concerns me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember [him] making others roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘never intended to retire, really’
There are numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside an animal carcass for The Revenant. It’s quite possible that Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, three years after that film came out. Each of these instances, in part, is meant to invoke the seriousness in which Day-Lewis takes his craft.
An Admirable But Uphill Battle
Moreover, while his fightback to critics of the Method might be noble, a short publicity tour may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, let alone their practices. Perhaps 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 just start making more films. Surely everyone would support that idea.
