Of the two regimes of the visible, Futurism refuses narrative order and appraises the iconic-performative, conceiving cinema as a system of expression built on the visual signifier of the image, and on its self-referential power. In this way, Futurism invests cinema as a metalinguistic system by its very nature. Therefore, Futurist cinema, albeit unconsciously, is a work on the main characteristics of the system of visibility and on the conditions of the possibility of representation. These conditions of possibility are the forms themselves, of perceiving: subjectivity, space, and time – the Kantian categories of perception – that art has always elaborated, both separately and indirectly, and that, in cinema, are, instead, unified. In so doing, Futurist cinema catches the qualitative margin in cinematographic language that makes it a form of artistic expression, or rather, it gives itself, not as a communicative system that brings out copies of reality, but, rather, as an alteration of the set of images provided by the latter, re-articulating and reworking the semantics within a system of iconic symbols put together so as to restore the perceptual dynamics of individual vision.

In other words, as in ‘pictorial dynamism’ and then in ‘plastic dynamism’, Umberto Boccioni tried to find an aesthetic-formal equivalent able to convey the phenomenal datum filtered through the subjectivity of perception. Similarly, Futurist cinema looks for a dynamo-genic performance of ongoing life and a cinematographic shape of the energetic flow in evolution. Choosing an anti-narrative aesthetic and aiming towards the ontological quality of a language based on self-referentiality of the image, Futurist cinema recognizes and puts into shape a theoretical vision, authentically modern.