It’s been quite some time since the public caught a glimpse of the acclaimed actor Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 that he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the debut of Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis quietly faded from view. Yet, in his absence, his legend expanded further.
The Mythos of His Method
Primarily, this reputation revolves around his preferred approach to roles. As someone who famously immerses himself in the roles he plays – for example, while filming Lincoln, he had the director call him “Mr President” for the entire production – audiences has grown increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he actually sent texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Did he only eat game he hunted during Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: have we lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, somewhat reluctantly, for his new film Anemone. He is taking this chance to express his anger at how the Method technique is perceived. “I’m a little cross nowadays to hear various individuals talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which I think suggests that someone is behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to the New York Times. “Everyone tends to focus on superficial details of the work, and these elements always seem to involve some form of self-flagellation or an experience that imposes upon oneself a severe discomfort or psychological strain. But of course, in the life for a performer, it has to principally be about the internal work.”
A World Full of Followers
To be honest, this sounds as if Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion and found himself aghast at the world that has been created mirroring his methods. When you are widely considered among the best performers to ever work, and your approach involves striking a prop to the point of injury (in Gangs of New York) or spending two days in solitary confinement deprived of sustenance (for In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that fellow performers will attempt to emulate that example by trying to mimic your hero.
In other words, we exist in an environment populated by imperfect Day-Lewis impersonators who strive only to demonstrate the extensive degree of effort they invest in a character. On the milder side of this trend 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 for a year and a half in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself into the role of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” presents to his castmates. These items, according to various accounts, range from dead pigs and rats to anal beads and used condoms, although Leto denied those worst excesses. And then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully as Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that they literally managed to get a full-length documentary from behind-the-scenes footage of him causing difficulties to the utmost for his colleagues.
The Modern Method Practitioners
The main Method Guy currently seems to be Jeremy Strong (formerly Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the basis of a critical magazine feature, including statements from individuals who were worried for his behaviour (“The toll on himself concerns me,” said Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I remember him causing everyone else roll their eyes,” stated an anonymous cast member).
The actor claims he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield abstained from sex over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in an animal carcass during The Revenant. It’s quite possible that Austin Butler continues to talk in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. Each of these instances, to some extent, aims to evoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis approaches his work.
A Noble But Uphill Battle
Moreover, while his fightback to critics of the Method could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to change anyone’s mind, let alone their behaviour. Maybe if he wishes to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to demonstrate its potential results, then the optimal strategy for Day-Lewis is to just begin producing more films. Certainly we could all get behind that.
