到1930年，第二屆奧斯卡，學會決定不再頒發「Unique and Artistic Production」，將「Outstanding Picture」定為最高榮譽獎項，並追溯生效；這個獎的名稱改過幾次，就是現時的「Best Picture（最佳電影）」。《日出》就這樣，無端被褫奪「最佳」電影的榮銜，也是唯一獲頒「Unique and Artistic Production」的電影，真夠unique。
“The main reason why Fox and the Americans were so amazed by Murnau’s work in The Last Laugh, and why they brought him to Hollywood, was what they called the continuous technique of shooting. D.W. Griffith had invented editing, and in silent films there were many cuts in every scene. Murnau, in opposition, pushed to an extreme the idea of the camera moving like a person through a scene. Remember the scene at the beginning of Sunrise in which the hero (George O’Brien) listens to the city woman whistling far away? The camera is him as it goes through the trees and weeds of the swamp, until it gets to the river and meets the woman of the city. All of that scene is in one shot. There are many other scenes like this in Sunrise – long dollies – and that was unusual at the time. That’s why Murnau was brought to Hollywood, for this special technique he had developed."
Almendros, Nestor. 2003. “Sunrise, which earned ASC members Charles Rosher and Karl Struss the first Oscar for cinematography, has inspired filmmakers around the world." American Cinematographer, Volume 84, Number 6. Retrieved from http://www.theasc.com/magazine/june03/sub/index.html
“Since Four Devils took place in a circus, Murnau wanted a camera that could move easily and catch the excitement of the setting. “Naturally the camera must not stand stock still in one spot in such a gay place as a circus!" he wrote. “It must gallop after the equestrienne, it must pick out the painted tears of the clown and jump from him to a high box to show the face of the rich lady thinking about the clown."
The Fox technicians built what Murnau described as “sort of [a] traveling crane with a platform swung at one end for the camera" — in other words, a camera crane, a full year before Universal supposedly built the first one for Broadway Melody. Murnau’s staff called the crane “the Go-Devil," and the director was enthralled with the crane’s utility and grace. “The studios will all have Go-Devils, some day, to make the camera mobile," he commented."
Eyman, Scott. 1997. The speed of sound: Hollywood and the talkie revolution, 1926-1930, pp.171-172. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
“If you’ll permit me to use one of those formulas which come to me as I write my notes, human life could be defined as a calculus in which zero was irrational. This formula is just as image, a mathematical metaphor. When I say “irrational," I’m referring not to some unfathomable emotional state but precisely to what is called an imaginary number. The square root of minus one doesn’t correspond to anything that is subject to our intuition, anything real–in the mathematical sense of the term–and yet, it must be conserved, along with its full function. (Lacan 1977a, pp. 28-29, seminar held originally in 1959)"
original citation: Lacan, Jacques. 1977a. “Desire and the interpretation of desire in Hamlet“. Translated by James Hulbert. Yale French Studies55/56: 11-52.
Sokal, Alan D., and J. Bricmont. 1998. Fashionable nonsense: postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: Picador USA, p. 25.
“Is E=Mc2 a sexed equation? Perhaps it is. Let us make the hypothesis that it is insofar as it privileges the speed of light over other speeds that are vitally necessary to us. What seems to me to indicate the possibly sexed nature of the equation is not directly its uses by nuclear weapons, rather it is having privileged what goes the fastest… (Irigaray 1987b, p.110)"
original citation: Irigaray, Luce. 1987b. “Sujet de la science, sujet sexué?" In Sens et place des connaissances dans la société, pp. 95-121. Paris: Centre National de Recherche Scientifique.
Sokal, Alan D., and J. Bricmont. 1998. Fashionable nonsense: postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: Picador USA, p. 109.
“This passage contains the most brilliant mélange of scientific, pseudo-scientific, and philosophical jargon that we have ever encountered; only a genius could have written it."
Sokal, Alan D., and J. Bricmont. 1998. Fashionable nonsense: postmodern intellectuals’ abuse of science. New York: Picador USA, p. 166.