Glossary

Brand film vs corporate video: what is the difference?

A brand film communicates what a company stands for; a corporate video communicates what it does. They are different products with different objectives, different production approaches and different price points.

The terms are used interchangeably in briefs and they should not be. A corporate video is functional — it informs, explains, documents or trains, and it is judged on whether the audience understood. A brand film works on perception, and it is judged on whether the audience feels differently about the company afterwards.

That difference in objective drives everything downstream. Corporate video is usually more efficient to produce: tighter scripts, fewer locations, faster turnaround. Brand film front-loads concept development, because the film is decided before anything is shot, and compressing that stage produces a competent execution of an unresolved idea — the most expensive kind of film there is.

The comparison

Brand film compared with corporate video
Brand film Corporate video
Communicates What you stand for What you do
Judged on Whether perception shifted Whether it was understood
Audience Broad — market, peers, candidates Narrower — prospects in process, staff, stakeholders
Concept Written by the agency Often supplied in the brief
Production Cinematic, multiple locations Efficient, tighter scope
Shelf life Years Months to a couple of years
Typical cost €5.500–€50.000 €2.500–€20.000

Which one you actually need

In practice

On the Pelican Rouge rebrand, one film had to signal genuine change and honour decades of history at the same time. The solution was to show the craft rather than assert the values — and because the craft on screen is genuinely old, the same footage communicated continuity and renewal at once. That kind of reconciliation is a brand film problem, not a corporate video one.

See scope, cost and selected work on the brand films page.

Last updated: