It has been quite some time since the public caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, prior to the release of Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, in his absence, his reputation expanded further.
The Mythos of His Method
Primarily, this legend revolves around his preferred approach to roles. Being an actor known for immerses himself in the roles he plays – for instance, during Lincoln, reportedly asked Steven Spielberg call him “Mr President” for the entire production – the world has become more fascinated with his process. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he consumed solely animals he’d killed for The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand receiving food via spoon for My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?
Currently, Day-Lewis is back to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. And he is taking this chance to express his frustration regarding how method acting is viewed. “I’m a little cross nowadays to hear all kinds of people gobbling off and saying things like ‘gone full method’, which I think suggests that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in a drastic way,” he stated to the New York Times. “Everyone often concentrate on the less important aspects of acting, and these elements always seem to involve 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 must principally be about the internal work.”
A World of Imitators
To be honest, this sounds as if Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion only to discover aghast at the world that has developed in his image. If you’re widely considered one of the greatest actors in history, and your process includes striking a prop to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or enduring 48 hours in isolation deprived of sustenance (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will want to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic their idol.
In other words, we now live in an environment full of half-cocked Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to show the world the extensive degree of dedication they put into their roles. On the milder side 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 entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she became an Italian native for a year and a half as preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who decided to deeply embed himself in the character as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “disturbing” presents to fellow cast members. These items, according to various accounts, included dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and used condoms, although the actor refuted those worst excesses. And then, naturally, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that they succeeded to get a full-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
Contemporary Method Practitioners
The main practitioner of the Method currently would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the basis of a derisive magazine feature, including statements from individuals who were worried about his conduct (“It’s the cost to himself concerns me,” remarked Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
There are 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 still speaks in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. All of this, in part, aims to evoke the dedication with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
A Noble Yet Challenging Fight
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, let alone their behaviour. Maybe if he wishes to remind people the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to just begin producing more films. Surely everyone would support that idea.
