Director Niels La Croix on being out of the box, unconventional and staying ahead of the ordinary.

In filmmaking, especially in crafts like food and tabletop, perfection is often the expectation. Clean surfaces, controlled movement, flawless styling, the illusion of effortlessness. But the most memorable work rarely comes from polish alone. It comes from tension, invention, and the ability to turn ingredients, textures, light, and motion into something emotionally charged. Niels La Croix is a director who exemplifies this approach.

That’s part of what makes Niels La Croix ‘s work stand out. Over the years, he has built a visual language that feels precise yet alive, crafted yet unexpected, pushing food, live action, and tabletop filmmaking beyond pure seduction and into something more cinematic, tactile, and genuinely surprising.

Niels has been part of the FilmmakersWorld community for a long time. We recently reconnected with him about one of his latest projects, a bold ode to ingredients that we already explored in a first breakdown on FilmmakersWorld.

But that piece only opened the door. 

This conversation goes deeper: into the instincts, collaborators, practical obsessions, and forward-looking questions behind a director who still believes in making the ordinary extraordinary.

Niels, we’ve followed your work for a long time, and what keeps standing out is that your films never feel like “just” food advertising. There’s always a sense of surprise, tension, and design behind them. What do you think clients and agencies are really coming to you for today?

It’s interesting you say that, because I’ve actually never set out to become a food director. That really just happened along the way. What I’ve always been focused on is developing a strong visual language. Using camera techniques, in-camera solutions, and design to create something that feels intentional and cinematic. Food simply turned out to be a very powerful medium to express that.

So if I think about why clients and agencies come to me today, it’s probably because my starting point is not “how do we make the food look as good as possible?” That part, in my opinion, is relatively straightforward. The real question is: how do we elevate the entire film? How do we make sure everything works together, from A to Z, so it becomes more than just a sequence of beautiful food shots?

We’re operating in a world where people are exposed to thousands of marketing messages every single day, mostly while scrolling. That means we have a very small window to capture attention. Whether it’s a commercial or social content, it has to entertain, surprise, or engage almost instantly. Otherwise, it simply disappears.

That’s why I focus so much on creating something distinctive. Through visual language, through story, or sometimes just through a sense of surprise. It needs to feel different from everything else out there. Because that’s the only way to truly hold someone’s attention.

For me, food is just a vehicle to express that approach. It’s where I’ve done most of my work, but it’s not the starting point. And I’m very open to applying the same thinking to other categories as well.

Your work feels highly controlled, but never sterile. There’s often something tactile, slightly unpredictable, even visceral in the frame. How would you define the creative signature you’ve built over time?

I think that balance between control and something more alive is very intentional. My work can feel quite technical, whether it’s driven by camera language or by performance, but the goal is never to make it feel sterile.

With food, that becomes even more complex. Making food look truly great requires very specific techniques, especially in lighting, styling, and framing. But those techniques don’t always naturally align with directing the cast or building a live-action moment. So the real challenge, and where I think the craft comes in, is making sure both worlds work together seamlessly. The food and the human side need to support each other, not compete.

I also do more pure tabletop work, where there’s no live action at all, and that allows me to be more abstract and experimental. But regardless of the format, my intention is always the same: to push for something that feels distinctive and elevated.

I’m not interested in repeating myself or making something that already exists. That’s the easiest thing to do, but it also means you stop evolving. For me, it’s about constantly pushing forward, challenging myself, and finding a new angle for every project. Sometimes that’s more performance-driven, sometimes more visual or abstract, but it always needs to feel like a step forward.

Before directing, you spent years as an Art Director on the agency side. How much has that background shaped the way you approach concept, problem-solving, and what makes an image truly land in advertising?

Yes, I started my career as an Art Director in advertising, and that background still shapes everything I do today. It allows me to really connect with creatives at agencies. I understand what they’re trying to achieve, but also the reality that they’re working within, including the dynamics with clients who may have different perspectives.

Because of that, I see my role very clearly. I’m not a director who comes in to impose a personal vision at all costs. I see myself as an applied creative, someone who takes an idea from the agency and elevates it to its highest potential.

I understand how agencies think, how clients think, and how the entire process works. That allows me to not only execute, but also to support, guide, and strengthen the idea along the way.

Ultimately, my goal is to merge my own vision with the agency’s vision, so together we can create the strongest possible work for the client.

In a moment where almost anything can be simulated, what still excites you about solving things physically — in camera, with real materials, real light, real motion?

It’s true that today you can create almost anything in post. But what I find interesting is that in the pursuit of perfection, which is ultimately unattainable, you reach a point where something else can emerge.

You work extremely hard to get everything as precise as possible, and once you’re there, it often comes down to very small variations. A chip falling into seasoning will never behave exactly the same twice. Even in a highly controlled setup, that unpredictability is what brings a shot to life.

The same applies to casting. You can work with great actors, but there are always a few takes that stand out above the rest. That’s the magic you’re looking for.

So you do everything to get as close to perfection as possible, but in the end, it’s the moments that happen on set that really matter. For me, capturing that in-camera is often more powerful and more direct than building it entirely in post. That said, I do see post-production as an important tool, but not the starting point.

Do you still feel there are practical or in-camera territories within tabletop that remain underexplored? Where do you think the next real leap could come from?

I think the biggest opportunity lies in experimentation. In having the courage to make work that hasn’t been made before. The challenge, of course, is that clients are naturally risk-averse. If they can’t clearly see what they’re going to get, it feels like a risk, and that makes bold ideas harder to sell.

That’s where trust comes in. Often, it comes down to your portfolio and your ability to communicate the vision. And while some clients actively seek experimentation, many are also satisfied with safe, incremental results. There isn’t always a strong incentive for them to take big creative risks.

But I do believe that when agencies and clients truly trust a director, the level of work can elevate significantly. With more creative freedom, there’s simply more room for something special to happen. Without that trust, the work can still be good, but it rarely reaches that same level of magic.

I see a growing tendency to create out of caution, and that’s a shame. It leads to more uniform, predictable work. Not just for the craft, but also for the brands themselves. As a creative industry, I think we should keep pushing against that and continue to make space for braver ideas.

We recently featured your ingredient-driven project on FilmmakersWorld, and what came through strongly was the ambition to move beyond polished tabletop aesthetics toward something bolder and more sensory. Looking back at that film now, do you feel it opened new creative directions for you? Are there ideas from that process you’d still like to push even further?

For me, this project really proves that when you’re given full trust from both the client and the agency, and you’re supported by a strong production team, a lot more becomes possible.

What I found exciting is that it allowed us to create a visual language that I hadn’t really seen before in tabletop work. Of course, there were moments where the client had doubts during the process, which I completely understand. Even with strong storyboards and references, it can be difficult to fully imagine something that doesn’t quite exist yet.

But that trust made the difference. It gave me the space to really push and elevate the work.

I don’t do a lot of pure tabletop films; I usually combine food with live action and different techniques. So when I do approach tabletop, my goal is not to make the most polished version of something that already exists. I’m more interested in using the same craft and the same level of execution to create a different kind of visual language. Something that feels new.

Visualizza questo post su Instagram

Un post condiviso da Filmmakers World 🎥🎬 (@filmmakersworld)

Do you want to learn more about this project? Read more here.

Tabletop is often perceived as a highly specialised niche, but people don’t always realise how deeply collaborative it really is. Who are the closest creative partners you rely on when building one of these films — and how early do they enter the process?

Like with any strong film, it always starts with a great idea, often coming from the agency. That’s the foundation. No matter how well you execute, if the idea isn’t strong, the film won’t be either.

From there, it’s about understanding what the project needs. Sometimes that’s a strong visual language, sometimes it’s casting, sometimes it’s exceptional food styling, and often it’s a combination of all those elements.

Collaboration is essential in every project, but when and how people come in really depends on the job. What I do push for, though, is working with the best possible collaborators. Their level directly impacts the final result.

So it’s less about a fixed moment in the process, and more about building the right team around the specific needs of each project.

How do you manage the creative process with your collaborators when the brief is ambitious and the execution window is tight? And beyond technical ability, what makes a team truly great?

I actually see it the other way around. If I’m asked to deliver something impossible, then I haven’t done my job properly. I don’t overpromise, because that only creates problems later on.

Of course, expectations can be high, especially in recent years, when clients and agencies often want a lot for relatively limited budgets. So my approach is always to maximize what’s realistically possible within the given constraints.

Most projects operate under tight timelines and budgets; that’s just the reality. So it starts upfront. Making sure expectations are aligned and that what we propose is achievable.

I have a good understanding of what each department needs in terms of time and resources, so already during the treatment phase, I work closely with production to ensure that the creative vision matches the budget.

My style isn’t necessarily the cheapest, but even with limitations, if the idea is strong, you can still create something beautiful.

AI is entering almost every part of commercial image-making. In tabletop specifically, are you seeing it as a genuine creative tool, mostly a development aid, or still something that struggles to replicate what makes this craft special?

At the moment, I use AI more as a tool, but it’s not fully integrated into my work yet. You won’t see fully AI-generated visuals in my films for now, although I’m definitely not against it.

What I still value a lot is the in-camera process and that sense of magic I mentioned earlier, which I don’t yet see AI fully replicate. That said, AI is here to stay and it will have a major impact on our industry. I see both challenges and opportunities, and I approach it in a realistic way rather than being afraid of it.

What I do think is important is to avoid creating generic, uniform work. With AI, almost anything is possible at the push of a button, but that can quickly lead to visuals that feel artificial or disconnected.

In the end, like with everything, it comes down to the idea. Form follows function. Sometimes AI is exactly the right tool, and sometimes it isn’t. It all depends on the concept.

You’ve described yourself as largely self-taught — shaped by curiosity, experimentation, and years in art direction. For a young director with strong visual instincts today, would you still recommend building a path through real-world craft and testing, rather than jumping straight into prompt-based tools? Why?

That’s a good question, and I don’t think there’s one clear answer. What I would say is that young filmmakers should really look at what excites them. If AI inspires you, explore that. If you’re drawn to in-camera filmmaking, follow that path.

If your main goal is just to be successful, I don’t think you’re choosing the right profession. This industry is about creative expression, so you have to follow your instincts and your curiosity.

Stay open-minded. Don’t limit yourself to one approach. If you like AI, don’t dismiss in-camera work, and vice versa. Focus on what you want to say, and then choose the form that best supports that idea.

AI is a powerful tool and shouldn’t be underestimated, but it’s not a one-size-fits-all answer. In the end, it depends entirely on the person, their ambitions, and what they want to create. Form always follows function.

What advice would you give to an aspiring director who wants to build a serious career and make sure their images carry more than just visual appeal?

Dare to experiment.

In a moment when commercial image-making is becoming faster, cleaner, and increasingly synthetic, Niels La Croix is a reminder that craft still has the power to surprise.

Not just through precision, but through curiosity, risk, and the ability to find something cinematic inside everyday ingredients. His work lives in that rare space where control meets play,  where food advertising stops being a technique and becomes a language of its own.

Explore more of Niels La Croix ‘s work here: website and IG profile.

Thanks for reading, and stay tuned for more stories from the set on FilmmakersWorld. In case you missed our latest article, please check it here.

Much Love,
The Filmmakersworld Team