When news broke that one of the greatest actors of his generation was coming out of retirement after seven years, no one was more excited than us here at Premium Def. Anemone marks the directorial debut of Daniel Day-Lewis’ son Ronan, a film co-written by the father/son duo. This got us excited and talking and asking: Is it possible to pinpoint Day-Lewis’ best character and film? Are the two not synonymous you ask?

HONOURABLE MENTIONS

For starters, we have the obvious: William Cutting/Poole (Bill the Butcher) from Scorsese’s Gangs of New York. A captivating interpretation of a known gangster, played with brooding savagery that even, dare we say it, overshadowed an out-weighted Leonardo Dicaprio. Unfortunately, due to a bloated script, an overindulgence in slow-motion fight sequence close-ups, a miscast Dicaprio and unsuitable Cameron Diaz, it is not one of Scorsese’s best (we will come back you Mr. Scorsese, don’t fret!). Our conclusion: Brilliant character, okay film.

WATCH OR NOT: WATCH

Also notable are Lincoln/Lincoln and Reynolds Woodcock/Phantom Thread.  both feature undeniably brilliant performances within films we, frankly, never wrote home about. Our conclusion: Brilliant characters, okay films.

WATCH OR NOT: WATCH

Lastly we would be remiss if we didn’t mention Gerry Conlon/In the Name of the Father. This one was not hard to remove from contention, but it is deserving mostly for what Day-Lewis doesn’t do. Conlon’s journey is heart breaking and extreme, and without fuss or flash from Day-Lewis. His restraint is the heart and soul of the film and both are impossible to look away from. Our conclusion: Brilliant character, very good film.

WATCH OR NOT: WATCH

And so…with much discussion we have concluded that these are Day-Lewis’ best, featuring his most fascinating characters within extraordinary films that reside on opposite ends of the emotional spectrum. Which one wins the battle:

THERE WILL BE BLOOD (2007)

Day-Lewis is the fiercely driven industrialist Daniel Palinview, an American oil man embodied with purpose. He has no friends, no woman and (seemingly) no past. He does have an adopted son, to whom he grows ever colder towards especially after the boy’s hearing is compromised by an oil drilling rig accident. His coldness grows in response to Plainview’s uncontrollable panic at his inability to control all circumstances. For Plainview, money and power govern all, yet his son’s deafening shows him that human vulnerability is fated. Money and power do not govern the power of God. The townfolk are torn between greed and God as Plainview and the preacher Eli Sunday (Paul Dano) vie for control, with their dukes, respectively, up and down. In fact we are never introduced to the town’s mayor or sherif. Politics and law are mere shadows.

Plainview is the wolf, embodying secularism, an outwardly deceitful demeanour and unapologetic material ambition. By comparison, the preacher Sunday is the pursuit of goodness for goodness’ sake. To be seen by God is to be shamed by the preacher, with religious authority being the ambitious sheep in wolf’s clothing. Who has the power? Is it whomever holds the money, regardless of the means from which one receive it? Does morality clash with capitalism, ambition and the pursuit of excessive wealth? Will blind faith in organized religion circumvent these inconvenient questions within the pursuit of the American dream? Capitalism and religion are at play in There Will Be Blood and neither is taking any prisoners.

It is a bleak, uncompromising tale of reprehensible wolves masterfully directed by Paul Thomas Anderson. Johny Greenwood’s haunting score pokes at us in the background as Day-Lewis (matched by Dano’s equal and alternative measures) forces us to face the truth about survival and greed.

WATCH OR NOT: WATCH

Additional musings: It could be argued that There Will Be Blood is a darker retelling of Citizen Kane. Both Industrialist’s fortunes begin with a stroke of luck (in place of oil, Kane strikes gold in the form of a rich foster father). Both learn through unfortunate events or betrayal that no one can be trusted. Both are left alone to wallow in the worthlessness of their successes. Kane comes to the light and sad humility that he cannot be loved and that is all he has ever always wanted. Plainview, on the other hand, continues into the darkness, hatefully destroying his competitors and making his own justice, singularly validating his choices and desolate existence.

THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (1993)

It often shocks acquaintances (even cinephiles) to learn that this 90’s historical drama set in upperclass 1870s New York society is in fact a Scorsese film. Where’s the blood? Where’s the frenetic mayhem? Well it’s all there, albeit quietly contained within Newland Archer’s (Day-Lewis) starched tall stand collars with clear winged tips. In fact, Scorsese himself called this his most violent film.

En lieu of the stark contrast and savage battle at play in There will Be Blood, Scorsese demures at the equally brutal battle between late 19th century New York society and one man’s tragic self imprisonment within it’s rules and his own nostalgia. This movie is often described as an historical romance, which it is, but the tragedy that befalls Archer is much darker than simply his unconsummated romance. Archer lives in the centre of a superficially beautiful America, yearning to be free from the confines of its societal eyes and judgements. He is cognizant of its disingenuous surface, mostly keeping his idealism to himself where it won’t harm the lie he finds abhorrent, while simultaneously protecting it. Every choice he makes is in service to upholding the lie. And he is not alone in this endeavour, he is just alone in deluding himself that there is some innocence to be protected. And he does this all while looking back, warming his heart with fantasies of what could have been if fate had intervened, instead of facing that it was his own inaction that kept him imprisoned.

WATCH OR NOT: WATCH

Additional musings: Some reviewers find the ending of this film unsatisfying, but therein lies the point of its making. It’s crushing to watch Day-Lewis seemingly give up. Newland is the hero of this story and complicity is not a hero’s trait. We know too much and want so much for Newland; we believe in him and his pursuit of truth and love. Instead, Day-Lewis breaks our hearts with his naivety and tragic unfulfillment.

 

DANIEL DAY-LEWIS BEST FILM BATTLE WINNER: DRAW

Final musing: There Will Be Blood and The Age of Innocence are two of the best movies every crafted, and Day-Lewis’ best. Some may argue that Blood is the clear winner, due to its epicness and no holds barred examination of lofty subjects such as America, greed and man’s true nature. However, we argue that Innocence is equally brutal and teases us into believing in virtue, love and sacrifice. Both are savage and leave us devastated. With Blood, Day-Lewis is at the centre with its cold, black honest heart, while within Innocence Newland’s agency is used to shield the truth, most pointedly in the final scene as our hero chooses to live in and remember a world that never was.