The story, writes Deleuze, will ‘replace filmstock, in a virtual film which now only goes on in the head’ (C2: 215). Noosigns are narratives emerging from cinematic matter-images; noosigns ‘force … us to think’ (C2: 189). The cinematic trajectory of the time-image is image (hyalosigns) → narration (chronosigns) → narrative (noosigns), where the narrative is the story arising from the narration composed of images. In the first place, the time-image emerges by overturning the regime of the movement-image through the creation of pure optical and pure sound situations: opsigns and sonsigns. These actual images are coerced to open up on to their virtual correlates as hyalosigns. When hyalosigns are organised into narration, we encounter chronosigns. And these arrangements constitute a new image of cinematic thought: the noosign. Accordingly, noosigns are the narrative as that which is eternally discordant: ‘problematic and problematizing’ (LS: 64). This storytelling function of the noosign is discordant thought engendered by the world and its bodies. Or rather, noosigns are the very emergence of the world and its bodies as discordant images. Thought is not engendered as a consequence of a given, actual sensory-motor linkage between the character and the miseen-scene, but rather through the absence of such relations. In the absence of an actual link and in the constitution of virtual relinkage, thought becomes us. Just as with hyalosigns and chronosigns, the noosign will also have three components, arranged as two elements of composition with respect to their temporal genesis. Deleuze names the poles world and the body; and the three signs corresponding to these poles are the body of attitude, the body of gest and the cinema of the brain. On the one hand, thought appears through the environments of the mise-en-scene. As Deleuze writes, ‘landscapes are mental states’, thus the mise-en-scene is ‘the brain’ (C2: 188, 205). On the other hand, thought appears through the body as ‘attitude’ and ‘gest’ (C2: 188, 205). ‘Gest’, a term taken from Bertolt Brecht, describes the way in which an actor can foreground gesture and performance as a social act. Attitude describes a body that does not act, that is displayed in its complex everydayness.