It’s been a long while since the public saw or heard from the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. After he statement in 2017 that he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the release of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, during his hiatus, his reputation expanded further.
The Legend Surrounding His Acting Method
Largely, this reputation centers on his preferred approach to roles. As someone known for immerses himself in the roles he plays – for instance, during Lincoln, he had the director call him “Mr President” throughout the shoot – audiences has grown more fascinated with his process. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Was it accurate that he consumed solely game he hunted during Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand being spoon-fed while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is taking this chance to vocalise his frustration regarding how the Method technique 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 suggests that a person’s acting insane in an extreme fashion,” he told the New York Times. “Everyone often concentrate on superficial aspects of acting, and these elements typically include some sort of self-flagellation or an experience that causes a severe discomfort or mental instability. However, in the career of an actor, it must mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
A World Full of Followers
To be honest, this sounds as if Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion only to discover shocked by the acting community that has developed mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered among the best performers to ever work, and your approach includes striking a prop until you break your nose (for Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in isolation deprived of sustenance (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by trying to mimic your hero.
Essentially, we exist in a landscape populated by half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of effort they put into their roles. At the shallow end of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was so desperate to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she spent the entire promotion attempting to persuade people that she became functionally Italian 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” presents to his castmates. These items, according to various accounts, included dead pigs and rats to anal beads and used condoms, though Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that they literally managed to get a full-length documentary out of B-roll of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
The Modern Method Practitioners
The foremost practitioner of the Method currently would appear to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the basis of a critical magazine feature, including statements from people who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll on himself concerns me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘did not plan to retire, truly’
We have numerous additional cases. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in a dead animal during 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, in part, aims to evoke the dedication in which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
And, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough 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 show them what it can achieve, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to just start making more films. Surely we could all get behind that.
