It has been a long while since the public saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his announcement in 2017 that he would cease to pursue acting, prior to the debut of The Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. Yet, during his hiatus, his reputation expanded further.
The Mythos of His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his preferred approach to roles. As someone who famously immerses himself in the roles he plays – for example, during Lincoln, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr President” throughout the shoot – the world has become increasingly obsessed with how he works. Did he actually sent messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he consumed solely animals he’d killed for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with actorly excess?
Now, Day-Lewis is back in the limelight, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is taking this chance to vocalise his anger at how method acting is perceived. “I am somewhat annoyed nowadays when I hear all kinds of people talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which seems is meant to imply that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to a major publication. “Everyone tends to focus on superficial details of the work, and these elements typically include some form of self-punishment or an experience that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or psychological strain. However, in the life of an actor, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
A World of Imitators
Frankly, it appears as if Day-Lewis has come out from his retreat and found himself shocked by the acting community that has been created in his image. If you’re widely considered among the best performers to ever work, and your approach includes headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or spending 48 hours in isolation without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that other actors will want to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic their idol.
In other words, we exist in a landscape full of half-cocked Day-Lewis impersonators who want nothing more than to show the world the sheer amount of dedication they put into 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 entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she became an Italian native over 18 months in preparation.
Additionally, there is Jared Leto, who chose to deeply embed himself in the character of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” gifts to his castmates. These, according to various accounts, range from dead pigs and rats to anal beads and used condoms, though Leto denied the most extreme claims. 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 full-length documentary out of B-roll of him causing difficulties to the utmost for everyone around him.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The foremost practitioner of the Method currently seems to be Jeremy Strong (once an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process while filming Succession was so laboriously intensive that it became the subject of a critical magazine feature, including statements from people who were either concerned about his conduct (“The toll on himself that worries me,” said Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember him causing others roll their eyes,” stated an anonymous cast member).
Daniel Day-Lewis says he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex for six months while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that actor Austin Butler continues to talk like Elvis Presley, three years after the movie’s release. All of this, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
A Noble Yet Challenging Battle
Moreover, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, not to mention their practices. Perhaps if he wishes to remind people the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate its potential results, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply begin producing more films. Surely we could all support that idea.
