🔗 Share this article

It has been quite some time 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, just before the debut of The Phantom Thread, Day-Lewis withdrew from the spotlight. Yet, during his hiatus, his reputation has only grown.

The Legend of His Method

Largely, this legend centers on his preferred style of working. Being an actor who famously disappears into the roles he plays – for instance, during Lincoln, reportedly asked the director address him as “Mr. President” for the entire production – the world has grown increasingly obsessed with how he works. Did he really send messages to co-star Sally Field as Abraham Lincoln? Was it accurate that he only eat game he hunted during The Last of the Mohicans? Did he demand being spoon-fed for My Left Foot?

Madness in their method: has the public lost interest with actorly excess?

Currently, Day-Lewis has returned to public attention, with some hesitation, for his new film Anemone. He is using this to express his anger regarding how method acting is perceived. “I’m a little cross these days 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 a major publication. “Everyone often concentrate on the less important details of the work, and these elements always seem to involve some form of self-punishment or an experience that causes extreme unease or mental instability. However, in the life of an actor, it has to principally be about the inner transformation.”

A World of Imitators

Frankly, 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 regarded as one of the greatest actors to ever work, and your approach includes headbutting a dummy to the point of injury (for Gangs of New York) or spending two days in isolation deprived of sustenance (during In the Name of the Father), it’s natural that other actors will attempt to emulate that example by imitating their idol.

Essentially, we now live in an environment populated by 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 so desperate to earn an Academy Award for House of Gucci that she dedicated the whole campaign attempting to persuade people that she transformed into an Italian native over 18 months in preparation.

Then we have Jared Leto, who decided to immerse himself in the character of the Joker (in Suicide Squad) by sending “disturbing” presents to his castmates. These, depending on who you ask, range from dead pigs and rats to intimate objects and personal hygiene products, although the actor refuted the most extreme claims. And then, of course, we have Jim Carrey, who went so deep into Andy Kaufman for Man on the Moon that they literally managed in creating a feature-length documentary out of B-roll of him making life to the utmost for everyone around him.

Contemporary Method Practitioners

The main Method Guy at the moment seems to be Jeremy Strong (formerly Day-Lewis’s assistant), whose approach during Succession was so rigorously detailed that it formed the basis of a critical magazine feature, including statements from individuals who were either concerned for his behaviour (“The toll on himself concerns me,” said Brian Cox) or annoyed beyond all measure by his actions (“I remember [him] making everyone else roll their eyes,” said an anonymous cast member).

Daniel Day-Lewis claims he ‘never intended to stop acting, truly’

We have so many other examples. Andrew Garfield went celibate for six months for Silence. Leonardo DiCaprio rested inside a dead animal during The Revenant. There’s a fighting chance that actor Austin Butler still speaks in the style of Elvis, years following the movie’s release. Each of these instances, in part, aims to evoke the seriousness in which Day-Lewis takes his work.

An Admirable But Uphill Battle

And, while his fightback against method detractors could be commendable, a brief promotional cycle might not be enough 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 Day-Lewis’s best bet is to just start making additional movies. Surely we could all support that idea.