It has been a long while since the public caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, just before the release of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis withdrew from the spotlight. However, in his absence, his reputation expanded further.
The Mythos Surrounding His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation revolves around his preferred style of working. As someone known for disappears into the roles he plays – for example, while filming the Lincoln biopic, he had Steven Spielberg call him “Mr. President” throughout the shoot – audiences has become increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Did he only eat game he hunted during Last of the Mohicans? Did he insist on being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Day-Lewis has returned in the limelight, somewhat reluctantly, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is taking this chance to express his anger regarding how the Method technique is viewed. “I am somewhat annoyed these days when I hear all kinds of people gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems is meant to imply that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to the New York Times. “Everyone tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and these elements always seem to involve some sort of self-flagellation or an experience that causes a severe discomfort or psychological strain. But of course, in the life for a performer, it must mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
A World of Imitators
Frankly, this sounds as if the actor has emerged from seclusion only to discover aghast at the acting community that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are 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 spending 48 hours in isolation without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by imitating your hero.
In other words, we now live in an environment full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to show the world the sheer amount of dedication they invest in a character. On the milder side of this trend we have people like 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 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) through sending “horrifying” gifts to fellow cast members. These items, according to various accounts, included deceased animals to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, though Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, naturally, there is Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that they succeeded in creating a feature-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties as impossible as he could for everyone around him.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The foremost Method Guy at the moment would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the subject of a critical magazine feature, including statements from people who were worried for his behaviour (“It’s the cost on himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by his actions (“I remember [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘did not plan to retire, 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 actor Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, years following that film came out. Each of these instances, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal against method detractors might be noble, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to alter perceptions, not to mention their practices. Maybe if he wishes to remind people the true essence of the Method, or to show them what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing additional movies. Certainly everyone would get behind that.
