Australian Traitors Season 2: Spoilers!! Spoilers!!

[periodiclabel]

For all those who have WATCHED Season 2 on Daily Motion and wish to discuss ... SPOILERS

The ending. What a blinder Camille played! And Sam still trying to talk her out of it. I would have done exactly the same.

I can't remember most contestant's names now but it was extraordinary how every time someone suspected Sam he deflected onto them and off they were banished. I couldn't work out if he was a genius or the rest of them were extraordinarily stupid. I certainly wouldn't be pleased if that psychologist woman was my therapist, dumb to the very last moment.

By moving on..I mean generally people need to understand that it's a game. Nothing meant by it really.

There's no moral obligation for anyone to allow anyone to win anything.
If you're a billionaire and don't care if you win or not, you're under no obligation to let/ensure others win the money. And part of being someone who wants the money is understanding you could walk away with nothing no matter how "hard" you worked or how much it's "deserved".

You always have the possibility of someone else being ruthless enough to make sure nobody wins regardless of personal wealth. Sam was ruthless enough to try and take everything. He took the risk and lost and then didn't like that what he did to others was done to him.

He's the kid that hits another kid in the playground and then goes running to the teacher when the other kid hits him....

I wonder if they could have a new role ...some one who knows who the traitors are, but the traitors don't know who that person is. And if they get through to a final of them Vs traitors.... and they remain undetected by traitors to the final they win everything hahaha

@wubwubwub oh of course Camille was under no moral obligation whatsoever. I just personally think working with Blake to banish Sam earlier was very possible, and would have been better gameplay, and I can't help but feel sorry for Blake on grounds he needed the cash.
I don't for a nano second think the traitors worked harder. I'm team faithful all the way, in every version. Much harder winning as a faithful (see my previous posts). Which is the main reason I think Annabel and Luke deserved to win. But, of all the remaining people in the final, I did feel sorry for Blake.
Yes, a new character, or some other adjustments are badly needed...

Anyway, the one thing we can all agree on is the scariness of Sam! I don't think there's any dissent here on that. I also think most of us agree that Annabel was fantastic.
I guess our only point of respectful disagreement is the extent to which Camille was the heroine. She only got recruited as a traitor because she voted Sam out, and he knew she was a threat, and being a traitor would prevent her rallying the troops against him. But, she voted Sam out, as a direct result of Annabel and Luke's detective work and altruism. So, for me, for this and other reasons, Annabel and Luke were the only deserving winners really. The true heroes of the piece.
On that note, I'd better get on with my day - working from home today. Got a bit distracted! 🤭 What is about The Traitors that does this to me?! I was the same for a couple of days after the UK one ended...

@ellebelli I'm just watching Survivor with Luke - he's hilarious. Feel like I should rewatch this now that I "know" him, but can't possibly bear any more Sam. No wonder Annabel was fan girling him!

I’ve seen one country with 2 traitors left and they had the traitors dilemma too.

but I don’t know if the ‘franchise’ makes the rules or each country is free to do as they see fit.

Good looking and funny?

No wonder Anabel was besotted with him.

Re faithfuls having the chance to win - UK series 1 winners only won because they were essentially directly told who the remaining traitor was!

No more than Luke and Annabelle spelt it out. The only difference was that the British lot bothered to listen!

I might be wrong but think that was one of the chances where if Blake had voted for Sam, he would have gone, despite Camille changing her mind.

He needed to stand on his own but just clearly not capable.

The OZ 1st series had different rules where a shield meant you didn't get banished nor murdered.
Maybe someone overlooked it as series 2 was only for murder.

So could be the traitors at the end have the selective Oz rules.

To be a good traitor, you need to be brave, skimming, build up trust, fly under the radar and convince people to banish someone without bringing up their name at the round table.

Blake lost too many chances. He knew he couldn't trust Sam and should have worked harder on teaming up with Camille.

@wubwubwub , absolutely!
It's like someone saying they should have won the lottery because they bought more tickets than someone who did win.

No need to feel sorry for Blake. He was trying to do Camille out of her share.

Apparently they all had names but the way they played it it was only Sam who was called the sheriff and Blake was something else, can't remember now! But they all did have names

I heard an hour long interview with her and she is 49, not in her 50s and she is not wealthy. I think her partner might be but as we all know on here that doesn't mean she is.

Sam and Blake were completely taking advantage of her good nature. They knew she was a sharer and knew that they could manipulate her into sharing while they completely ripped her off. They got exactly what was coming to them.

She did say that she acted the part of a sharer because she knew exactly what was going to happen at the end, if she got that far. She knew that would make them keep her as a traitor. She said she knew immediately there was no way that Sam would let her have any share of the money.

She outwitted them and that's what they couldn't stand. They completely underestimated her.

To be honest I thought if the two guys had written share and Camille had written steal, she would've shared it with them. I also think she would've shared with Blake if he had written share and she had written steal.

Sam definitely was. But, Blake was very apologetic. I don't think he wanted to do that to her, and he would have been happy to share three ways; but knew Sam would vote steal, so his hand was forced at that point.
It's just a shame it got to that point, and that he hadn't got Sam out earlier.

Ah OK, I probably was wrong about that then. Apologies.

I found it a bit of an exhausting watch. There was no light and shade, just shade! With the UK series I enjoyed seeing the contestants chat about their lives and get to know each other. Knowing they were forming friendships made it more poignant when they had to start picking each other.

Sarahs flipping in the banishment room every time a different name was mentioned was just embarrassing to watch.

I’m kind of glad it’s been cancelled in Australia as I know I couldn’t resist watching a third series and I don’t want to go through it again.

I did wonder if the fact it’s garnered quite a following here in the UK might tempt them to resurrect it for a third series. By all accounts it was barely watched in Australia! The Oz traitors subreddit has like 100 users vs thousands for the UK/US. I wonder why it just didn’t take off the same way?

We watched both series back to back - was sad to see Craig from series 1 wanted the money to support his disabled daughter. Alex seems to be spending her winnings on holidays (and no judgement from me, she can spend how she likes!).

Ending of series 2 was brilliant but we spent every episode up to that shouting at the TV about how bloody stupid they all were!

Think it lacked the right amount of suspense.
The contestants chatting back to Roger downed it down a bit.
Takes away from it being a serious mission.
It's a game but have respect for the presenter.

I don't find the Aus version well edited or atmospheric, and while I don't dislike the presenter, I don't think he really adds anything. He's not annoying or unlikeable but he's just a guy in a suit who turns up to tell them what's happening next. Pretty nondescript.

Oh, actually, though I'm totally #teamAnnabelandLuke, and think the faithfuls remaining after episode 6 were daft as brushes (bless them!) I do think they were very different scenarios. Annabel and Luke were faithfuls, so of course couldn't be 100%. Also, it was only about halfway, and still lots of players to choose from, so lots of risks.
With the Kieron bombshell, he was a traitor by then, so knew the truth definitively. It was the final, so the remaining three faithfuls had nothing to lose by banishing Wilf. He couldn't have done anything to them by that point.
Of course, after Annabel was banished and Luke murdered, then it was plainly obvious that Sam was a traitor! But, still not in the same category as Kieran's parting gift.

Just finished the series - blimey. I had no idea about this traitor’s dilemma thing, not heard it been mentioned until this episode. All you hear throughout the show is if there are any traitors at the end, they take the money.

i mean I’m delighted Sam got nothing the little twat, but I do feel a bit like they threw in something at the end which was a bit unfair.

Annabelle and Luke though. Heroes. That round table where Annabelle named both Sam and Blake was about the best thing there’s ever been on any version imho.

They would have all known about traitors dilemma from beginning/before the game started.

Loved this series.

And Camille was brilliant. I'm so glad Sam and Blake didn't get one over on her.