It has been a long while since the public caught a glimpse of Daniel Day-Lewis. Following his statement in 2017 declaring he would cease to work as an actor, prior to the debut of The Phantom Thread, the actor withdrew from the spotlight. However, during his hiatus, his legend expanded further.
Largely, this legend centers on his preferred approach to roles. Being an actor known for immerses himself in his characters – for instance, while filming Lincoln, he had Steven Spielberg address him as “Mr. President” for the entire production – the world has become increasingly obsessed with how he works. Is it true he really send texts to Sally Field in character as Lincoln? Did he consumed solely game he hunted for The Last of the Mohicans? And did he demand being spoon-fed for My Left Foot?
Extreme acting methods: has the public fallen out of love with actorly excess?
Currently, Daniel Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, promoting his latest movie Anemone. He is taking this chance to express his anger at how method acting is perceived. “I’m a little cross nowadays to hear all kinds of people talking carelessly and using phrases like ‘gone full method’, which I think is meant to imply that a person’s behaving like a lunatic in an extreme fashion,” he stated to the New York Times. “People tends to focus on superficial aspects of acting, and these elements typically include some sort of self-flagellation or an experience that imposes upon oneself extreme unease or psychological strain. However, in the career for a performer, it must mainly focus on the internal work.”
Frankly, it appears as if Day-Lewis has emerged from seclusion only to discover aghast at the world that has been created mirroring his methods. When you are regarded as one of the greatest performers to ever work, and your approach involves headbutting a dummy until you break your nose (in Gangs of New York) or enduring two days in solitary confinement without food or water (for In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that fellow performers will want to fill that vacuum by trying to mimic your hero.
In other words, we exist in a landscape full of half-cocked imitators of Day-Lewis who want nothing more than to show the world the extensive degree of effort they invest in a character. At the shallow end of the pool there are performers such as Lady Gaga, who was determined to win an Oscar with House of Gucci that she dedicated the whole campaign trying to convince everyone that she became functionally Italian for a year and a half in preparation.
Then we have Jared Leto, who chose to immerse himself in the character of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) through sending “horrifying” gifts to fellow cast members. These, according to various accounts, included deceased animals to intimate objects and used condoms, though Leto denied the most extreme claims. And then, of course, there is Jim Carrey, who immersed himself so fully into Andy Kaufman during Man on the Moon that filmmakers literally managed in creating a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life to the utmost for his colleagues.
The main practitioner of the Method at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (once Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose process while filming Succession was so rigorously detailed that it became the basis of a critical magazine feature, including statements from individuals who were either concerned about his conduct (“It’s the cost on himself that worries me,” remarked co-star Brian Cox) or extremely irritated by it (“I recall [him] making others roll their eyes,” said an unnamed co-star).
Daniel Day-Lewis claims he ‘never intended to retire, truly’
We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate over half a year while preparing for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio slept in a dead animal for The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that Austin Butler still speaks like Elvis Presley, three years after the movie’s release. Each of these instances, in part, aims to evoke the seriousness with which Day-Lewis takes his work.
Moreover, while his fightback to critics of the Method might be noble, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough to alter perceptions, let alone their practices. Maybe if he wishes to remind people what method acting is, or to show them what it can achieve, then Day-Lewis’s best bet is to just start making more films. Certainly we could all get behind that.