Soapbox 2025: Jordan Brady on The Director’s Treatment

In 25+ years directing commercials, I’ve written all but four of my own treatments and this is not a ‘back in the day’ soapbox. Yes, when I started the gig was awarded based on your reel and one conference call with the agency creatives. That call was as much a ‘vibe check’ as it was a pitch. Typically, we heard by the end of that same day or maybe as late as the next morning if we won the job. Those were the days, my friends.

Oddly, perhaps masochistically, I love the process of writing out my thoughts, diving deep into the material, dissecting how I’ll attack the agency’s script with vigor. How can I spew my DNA all over this project? But the modern director's treatment, no longer a simple word doc and two stock photos, has evolved into a highly-stylised coffee table book. Crafting such a treatment demands significant time, resources, and a sizable financial investment. This laborious process can cause us to neglect our families as we toil for that perfect image to go on the cover. And if we’re lucky, the creative team might actually read it.

I get it, it’s a competitive landscape so your treatment now needs high-end photography, intricate storyboards, maybe commissioned illustrations, AI-conjured images or even sound design. (I’ll often include links to crude video tests, if need be, but don’t get me started on that wonderful previz). At best it reflects one’s quest for professionalism. But a lot of this is responding to an underlying pressure to outdo the competitors. To win, we directors feel compelled to impress with visually stunning presentations that can resemble full-fledged productions when really it’s just a conceptual blueprint. The treatment is still a means to another means.

My question is, “Does this skill of editor-in-chief demonstrate what kind of filmmakers we are?” It can show attention to detail, sure. Style and taste… No doubt. But have you seen my reel? That shows the polish, tone and a point of view.

If I were in the agency’s shoes, the director’s reel and a quick call with her would tell me all I need to know. But what do I know?

This ‘arms race’ in treatments can pose a significant barrier for emerging filmmakers. They’re often operating with limited resources so they may fall short on funds. Even though they’re delighted that they got this opportunity, they can’t compete with the slick presentations of established directors, backed by their fancy-pants production company footing the bill. 

The expectation of elaborate treatments often risks overshadowing the core purpose of the exercise: communicating a director’s vision. I’ve seen treatments that are more about style than substance, reducing the focus on what truly matters – you know: the storytelling and creative approach. Craft is shown on the reel, so do you really care about what technocrane we use? My last winning treatment was just words explaining my approach and accompanied by crude stick figures that looked like a child made them. Despite its simplicity, the presentation resonated because it clearly articulated the narrative and emotional beats, underscoring that sometimes the agency’s great idea doesn’t require flashy visuals on paper. My rant here is really a compliment.

I wonder, too, doesn’t this ritual complicate decision-making for agencies and increasingly, their clients? When treatments are judged by their production value rather than the ideas they communicate, there’s a risk of prioritising form over function. I hope we never unknowingly sideline innovative concepts in favour of presentations that are visually impressive but lack depth.

Single bid your trusted filmmakers. It’s ok to know who you want and eschew the triple bid process. Once I made a fancy treatment, spelled out my innovative approach, but was unsuccessful—the outcome was influenced by internal relationships within the agency rather than the quality of the pitch. And that’s fine by me! God bless the incumbent.

It all comes down to trust. I feel any new director worthy of getting on a Zoom can successfully direct the spot. That’s assuming a bona fide production company surrounds said filmmaker with a top tier craftspeople and a seasoned producer. As long as the director can communicate their vision, we can manage the craft and collaborate spirit. So in a way, the treatment may actually be the very thing that helped the newbie instill trust in everyone. God bless the treatment.

It’s an uneven playing field for new and underrepresented filmmakers. Give them a shot. 

Directors with deep pockets for treatments gain an unfair advantage. This not only marginalises talented newcomers but also narrows the scope of ideas presented. Most of us are in the dark when it comes to how we’re chosen. How much did the treatment count? Was it that first ‘vibe check’ call? The lack of transparency can discourage directors from experimenting or pushing creative boundaries, fearing that bold or unconventional ideas might not align, might push it too far. So if you seldom get a chance to pitch, how far will you push creatively in your treatment?

Here are three actionable solutions I propose:

Treatments should prioritise clear and concise communication of the director's vision. Rather than relying on an abundance of elaborate visuals, directors should focus on articulating their ideas through compelling storytelling and succinct explanations.

Agencies and filmmakers should experiment with more cost-effective formats, such as short video presentations (I’ve done this a bunch), mood boards like feature filmmakers do, or simple well-written creative briefs. These alternatives can capture the essence of a director’s vision without requiring significant financial investment.

Agencies should offer a few grand towards costs of treatments. This might keep ya’ll from bidding more than the industry-standard three directors. 

US agencies should adopt a similar process to what is becoming popularised in Europe. For example, in Germany a Pitch Reform was rolled out in 2024, setting a new standard for all advertising film pitching. The Directors Association (DRCT) and the Producers Alliance Advertising Section developed the reform to modernise the pitch process. 

Prediction: AI templates and AI imagery will place value back on the written word.

If everyone generates images using AI tools and plots them into the same template we bought off Instagram, won’t it all become a blur? Now all of the sudden, it's, “who’s the best prompter?”

By embracing these changes, our beloved advertising-filmmaking collabs might foster a more equitable and efficient process for selecting directors. This shift would benefit not only agencies and filmmakers but also clients, who would gain access to a broader and more diverse pool of creative talent. Ultimately, the director’s treatment should be a tool for showcasing ideas and expressing one’s point of view, not a barrier to innovation. In an industry that thrives on fresh perspectives and bold storytelling, these reforms might foster a vibrant and inclusive future.