It has been a long while since the public saw or heard from Daniel Day-Lewis. After he announcement in 2017 declaring he would no longer pursue acting, just before the debut of Phantom Thread, the actor quietly faded from view. However, during his hiatus, his reputation has only grown.
The Legend Surrounding His Method
Primarily, this reputation revolves around his favored approach to roles. Being an actor who famously disappears into his characters – for example, during the Lincoln biopic, he had the director address him as “Mr President” throughout the shoot – the world has become more fascinated with how he works. Did he really send texts to Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted for Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand receiving food via spoon while filming My Left Foot?
Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with over-the-top performances?
Now, Daniel Day-Lewis is back to public attention, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. And he is taking this chance to express his frustration at how the Method technique is perceived. “I’m a little cross 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 tends to focus on the less important details of the work, and these elements always seem to involve some sort of self-flagellation or a situation that imposes upon oneself a severe discomfort or psychological strain. But of course, in the life for a performer, it has to mainly focus on the inner transformation.”
An Industry Full of Followers
Frankly, it appears like the actor has come out from seclusion and found himself aghast at the acting community that has developed in his image. If you’re regarded as among the best performers in history, and your process includes striking a prop until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or spending two days in solitary confinement without food or water (during In the Name of the Father), then it stands to reason that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by imitating their idol.
In other words, we now live in an environment full of imperfect imitators of Day-Lewis who strive only to show the world the sheer amount of dedication they put into their roles. On the milder side of this trend we have people like Lady Gaga, who was determined 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 in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who decided to immerse himself into the role as the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “disturbing” presents to fellow cast members. These, depending on who you ask, range from deceased animals to anal beads and personal hygiene products, although Leto denied the most extreme claims. Then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers succeeded in creating a full-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life to the utmost for his colleagues.
The Modern Followers of the Method
The main Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (formerly an assistant to Day-Lewis), whose process during Succession was so laboriously intensive that it formed the subject of a critical magazine feature, including statements from people who were either concerned for his behaviour (“It’s the cost to himself that worries me,” said Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I recall him causing others roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
The actor says he ‘did not plan to stop acting, really’
There are so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal for The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that Austin Butler still speaks like Elvis Presley, years following the movie’s release. Each of these instances, to some extent, is meant to invoke the dedication with which Day-Lewis takes his work.
An Admirable Yet Challenging Battle
And, although his rebuttal to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle may prove insufficient to alter perceptions, let alone their behaviour. Perhaps if he wishes to make audiences recall the true essence of the Method, or to show them its potential results, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to simply start making more films. Certainly we could all get behind that.
