The Traitors UK discussion thread *SPOILERS*

[LaGoosh]

7 minutes ago, wordsfromlee said:

It's working both ways. Theres even that blonde woman who's pretending to be a nail technician instead of admitting she's in the army. She reckons that people will think that being in the army is reason to be a traitor.

I think it was more that she thinks if everyone thinks she's "just" a nail technician they'll assume she's thick and not suspect her as a traitor. At least I think that's why but I don't really agree with the logic. 

[DavidB6937]

23 minutes ago, wordsfromlee said:

It's working both ways. Theres even that blonde woman who's pretending to be a nail technician instead of admitting she's in the army. She reckons that people will think that being in the army is reason to be a traitor.

Yeah that's true. I guess I don't really get the logic behind judging people on stuff before the show. It's mostly irrelevant. 

[TibBo]

1 hour ago, wordsfromlee said:

Theres even that blonde woman who's pretending to be a nail technician instead of admitting she's in the army. She reckons that people will think that being in the army is reason to be a traitor.

It’s probably because the lad that won last year was in the army?   
 
In all fairness she has got every vote wrong, so she has gone quite ‘method’ on the nail technician role.

I do love how every contestant always thinks their career makes them good at ‘reading people’, regardless of what the job is…

[Bus Surfer]

Kaz "Saves people by day, murders by night' - I love how unhinged and mental everyone is so early doors.

It's shaping up to be a good season, even if the spectacularly over the top Armani is already gone. Great TV, but I bet she's an absolute nightmare to be around. 

I really like how they've changed the tasks where the Traitors do need to kind of work against the faithfuls in some way. That really freshens it up a lot. 

 

Edited January 5, 2025 by Bus Surfer
Keith's a full kit wanker

[RedTwoster]

17 hours ago, DavidB6937 said:

Yeah that's true. I guess I don't really get the logic behind judging people on stuff before the show. It's mostly irrelevant. 

It’s irrelevant, but they do seem to do it - if you have a background that makes you seem intelligent - like a medical or academic background - you tend to have a target on your back early on, when they have little else to go on. It’s totally irrelevant when it comes to how useful (or dangerous) you are in the game, but as long as people think otherwise I can kind of understand why you’d hide it. That, and maybe if you have an interesting ruse in mind during the casting process, it might help you get on the show in the first place.

[DavidB6937]

7 minutes ago, RedTwoster said:

It’s irrelevant, but they do seem to do it - if you have a background that makes you seem intelligent - like a medical or academic background - you tend to have a target on your back early on, when they have little else to go on. It’s totally irrelevant when it comes to how useful (or dangerous) you are in the game, but as long as people think otherwise I can kind of understand why you’d hide it. That, and maybe if you have an interesting ruse in mind during the casting process, it might help you get on the show in the first place.

I guess 3 series (and however many overseas ones) in I'm more surprised they're still doing it as much as they are. It's a very easy and naive trap to fall into. 

[RedTwoster]

7 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

I guess 3 series (and however many overseas ones) in I'm more surprised they're still doing it as much as they are. It's a very easy and naive trap to fall into. 

I am too - along with the fact they still still do things like murder someone (Keith, in this case) to frame the person who voted for them. Somehow, the same mistakes are made year after year.

[DavidB6937]

2 minutes ago, RedTwoster said:

I am too - along with the fact they still still do things like murder someone (Keith, in this case) to frame the person who voted for them. Somehow, the same mistakes are made year after year.

Yeah it's a weird thing. I was worried the more the show went on the smarter they'd get to it but absolutely not. I get that there's no exact science to it anyway but it'd be nice to see a few more informed approaches to the game.

[LaGoosh]

1 hour ago, DavidB6937 said:

I was worried the more the show went on the smarter they'd get to it

I was pleased when someone at the roundtable said "why would they put two sisters in here and not make one of them a traitor?". It was actually someone being smart to how the show works and pointing out something which should have been obvious to all of them from the start. 

[DavidB6937]

14 minutes ago, LaGoosh said:

I was pleased when someone at the roundtable said "why would they put two sisters in here and not make one of them a traitor?". It was actually someone being smart to how the show works and pointing out something which should have been obvious to all of them from the start. 

Yes! That felt like the closest to being aware of the show and approaching it from a "well what would make good TV?" type perspective. It wouldn't have necessarily been right but it's definitely one of the closest things they had to a decent idea to follow.

[TibBo]

The morning after the first murder, the last 3 people to enter breakfast are always the ones the traitors were plotting to kill in the tower (to help build suspense for the show), so people should have noticed those 3 are always faithful by now 

[wordsfromlee]

2 hours ago, LaGoosh said:

I was pleased when someone at the roundtable said "why would they put two sisters in here and not make one of them a traitor?". It was actually someone being smart to how the show works and pointing out something which should have been obvious to all of them from the start. 

The first series had a couple, the second had a mother and son and they didn't make one of them a traitor so I wouldn't say it was an obvious thing to do this series.

[DavidB6937]

3 minutes ago, wordsfromlee said:

The first series had a couple, the second had a mother and son and they didn't make one of them a traitor so I wouldn't say it was an obvious thing to do this series.

Depends how you look at it. I would've argued that because they hadn't gone down that route before it made it more likely this time.

[Jesse]

1 hour ago, TibBo said:

The morning after the first murder, the last 3 people to enter breakfast are always the ones the traitors were plotting to kill in the tower (to help build suspense for the show), so people should have noticed those 3 are always faithful by now 

Apparently that's not true! (Sorry, I only read this yesterday so it's lodged in my brain) 

 

Edited January 5, 2025 by Jesse

[Mr_Danger]

3 hours ago, LaGoosh said:

I was pleased when someone at the roundtable said "why would they put two sisters in here and not make one of them a traitor?". It was actually someone being smart to how the show works and pointing out something which should have been obvious to all of them from the start. 

I feel like that sort of thing probably gets referenced a lot but left out because it takes them out of the immersive world they’re building the show around.

The fake nail technician is sisters in law with a lady who owns a beauty academy on my round so she’s probably got a lot of good first hand material to build her ‘character’ around because the amount of times that place has left a note for me when they’re closed to ring them and they’ll drive down from home to collect their parcel whilst I patiently wait to absolutely no avail tells me they’re not the most perceptive of fellows.