Kinema
Use cases Benefits Company
Kinema for in-house teams
67% of brands say creative production is their #1 growth constraint[1] Not budget. Not ideas. Production[1]

The whole film crew, in-house, today.

The production department you never had.

In-house teams use Kinema to direct finished video at the pace their channels demand: every asset generated inside a locked brand world, approved on the screenplay, and localized for every market from a single master.

Turn your next brief into finished video
One brief. Sixteen variants.
67% of brands name creative production their #1 growth constraint[1]
32% expect to take nearly all creative in-house within twelve months[2]
The in-housing wave has a missing piece

32% of brands expect to take nearly all creative in-house within twelve months,[2] and 60% of marketing leaders already spend less on agencies because of AI.[13] The strategy is right: speed, control, brand intimacy. The missing piece is production: the part that used to need a crew, a studio and a quarter. Kinema is that piece. Your team keeps the direction; the production happens in the browser.

A link in. A film out.

The budget is there. The ideas are there. The videos aren’t.

Marketing teams don’t lack ambition. They lack throughput. Creative production is now the #1 growth constraint for two thirds of brands,[1] and the teams that break through don’t just adopt AI. That’s table stakes. What separates the top performers producing 3× the output with the same headcount is workflow: how work gets approved, not how it gets typed.[3]

Kinema is built around that truth. The campaign exists as a screenplay first; stakeholders comment on the exact scene it concerns; you regenerate that one scene and everything else stands. Approval stops being the queue where campaigns go to wait, and production stops being the reason a good idea shipped a quarter late.

Feedback lands on the scene, not in the queue. Shorten the approval loop
01 3.2× the output of top-decile teams at the same headcount. Workflow, not AI adoption[3]
02 $150k a year for a two-person video team, fixed, whether the quarter needs six videos or sixty[4]

A video team costs $150k a year. A director costs a login.

Building real video capability used to mean hiring: a two-person video team runs around $150,000 a year, and a fully loaded in-house creative function starts at $8–15k a month[4]. Fixed costs that sit there whether the quarter needs six videos or sixty. And the biggest barrier was never money anyway: 43% of marketers say the missing piece is in-house skills.[5]

Kinema removes both. Anyone on your team who can brief can direct: pick from 140 video formats (ads, explainers, product tours, episodic series), shape the screenplay, and ship. The skills stay strategic; the production is the platform’s job.

140 formats. Zero new headcount. Make everyone a director
Five genres, one production line.
A product you never held.

Your channels need 15–30 new assets a month. 81% of companies go off-brand at that pace.

Feeding the algorithms takes 15–30 fresh assets a month[6]. And that volume is exactly where brands break: 81% ship off-brand content despite having guidelines,[7] and every external contractor reinterprets the brand from scratch.[8] Nobody carries that risk more personally than the in-house team. You are the brand’s last line of defense, and in a feed full of AI slop, audiences punish sloppiness harder every year: distrust of heavy-handed AI content doubled in twelve months.[9]

Kinema makes the guideline the production system: drop in the brand manual you already have, or samples of past work, and Kinema studies it: palette, typography, environments, tone of voice. The world locks, and asset #30 of the month is as unmistakably yours as asset #1. Directed, not generated, at exactly the volume the channels demand.

Consistent brands earn 10–20% more. Yours stays consistent at any volume.[10] Lock your brand world
03 81% of companies ship off-brand content despite having guidelines[7]
04 56% of brands with video content ever localize it, the economics never allowed more[11]

Your brand speaks eight languages. Your video budget spoke one.

Only 56% of brands with video content ever localize it[11]. The economics never allowed more. In Kinema, localization is a property of the screenplay, not a new production: one master campaign, regenerated into every market’s language (voiceover, on-screen text, cultural pacing) with the brand world locked across all of them.

The German version and the Spanish version aren’t adaptations that drifted. They’re the same film, fluent. For EU teams, that’s the difference between a headquarters campaign and a European one, at 70–90% below traditional localization costs.[12]

One master. Every EU market. One world. Localize from one master
Same story, recut per role.

What procurement will want to see.

Your data stays yours

Content you upload is never used to train AI models.

GDPR-ready

Built for European companies and European rules.

EU AI Act ready

AI-generated content transparently labeled, ahead of Article 50 requirements taking effect in August 2026.

Accessible by design

Captions and subtitles on every version.

The brand is the plot.

Sdílená komponenta napříč LP; claimy čekají na potvrzení.

 Bring your gatekeepers along

The in-housing decision is made. Finish it.

You brought the strategy in-house. Kinema brings the production: brand-locked, screenplay-approved, fluent in every market. The next campaign starts with a brief you already have.

Turn your next brief into finished video

Read also

Case study · Branded series

Your client’s own show. Delivered in a workday.

Ten to thirty vertical episodes with the product written into the plot. A season that used to cost $300,000 now costs a workday.

Read how it’s made  → Case study · Freelance marketers

Sell ads, reels and series, not hours.

AI video demand grew 329% in a year. 140 formats, a locked world per client, and a director’s name on every film.

Read how it scales  →
Sources
  1. Industry data 2026: 67% of brands name creative production their main growth constraint, up from 42% in 2024.
  2. NewtonX/ADWEEK: 32% of brands expect to take nearly all creative in-house within twelve months.
  3. Content operations research 2026: top-decile teams produce 3.2× the median at the same headcount, and the difference is approval workflow design rather than AI adoption.
  4. MHI, February 2026: a fully loaded in-house creative team costs $8–15k a month; a two-person video team around $150,000 a year.
  5. Wyzowl 2026: 43% of marketers name in-house skills the main barrier to video.
  6. Industry benchmarks: 15–30 new creative assets a month to hold paid channel performance against ad fatigue.
  7. Industry research: 81% of companies ship off-brand content despite having guidelines.
  8. Uplifted, Creative Team Structure 2026: external suppliers without a strong system reinterpret the brand from scratch each time, producing inconsistent output.
  9. Fractl 2026: the share of consumers who trust a brand less for heavy-handed AI rose from 20% to 40% in a single year.
  10. Lucidpress/Marq, State of Brand Consistency: consistency lifts revenue 10–20%.
  11. Gartner L2: only 56% of brands with video content localize it.
  12. Industry benchmarks: AI localization saves 70–90% against traditional language-version production.
  13. Typeface: 60% of senior US marketing leaders spend less on agencies directly because of AI.