It’s been a long while since the public caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 that he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the release of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
The Legend of His Method
Largely, this reputation revolves around his preferred approach to roles. Being an actor who famously disappears into his characters – for example, during Lincoln, reportedly asked the director call him “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has become more fascinated with how he works. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he insist on being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Currently, Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. He is taking this chance to vocalise his anger regarding how method acting is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays to hear various individuals gobbling off and saying things like ‘fully embraced the Method’, which seems is meant to imply that someone is acting insane in an extreme fashion,” he told the New York Times. “People often concentrate on superficial aspects of acting, and those details typically include some sort of self-flagellation or an experience that imposes upon oneself a severe discomfort or psychological strain. However, in the career of an actor, it has to mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
An Industry of Imitators
Frankly, it appears like Day-Lewis has come out from seclusion only to discover shocked by the acting community that has developed mirroring his methods. If you’re widely considered among the best performers in history, and your approach involves headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or spending 48 hours in isolation without food or water (during In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will attempt to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic their idol.
In other words, we now live in a landscape full of half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the sheer amount of effort they put into their roles. On the milder side of this trend there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to win an Oscar for House of Gucci that she dedicated the entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she transformed into functionally Italian over 18 months in preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who decided to deeply embed himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “horrifying” gifts to fellow cast members. These, depending on who you ask, range from dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and used condoms, although Leto denied the most extreme claims. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded to get a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him causing difficulties to the utmost for everyone around him.
The Modern Method Practitioners
The main Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (formerly an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the basis of a critical New Yorker profile, including statements from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll on 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 unnamed co-star).
The actor claims he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
We have numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside 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. All of this, to some extent, is meant to invoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
And, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to change anyone’s mind, not to mention their practices. Maybe if he wishes 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 simply begin producing additional movies. Certainly we could all support that idea.
