Interview by Francesco Carini CCS
I watched The Traitors Italia and really enjoyed the cinematic approach adopted for this reality show. What does it actually consist of?
The Traitors is a game show, a Dutch format created in 2021. I like to define it as a psychological reality show, because it reveals how far we are willing to go to trust… or to betray. It is set in a castle, where the participants must discover who the traitors are. In the initial phase, three “Traitors” are selected, and their identity remains unknown to the other contestants, the “Faithful”. Each night, the traitors eliminate one faithful player and, the following morning, during breakfast, everyone discovers who has been murdered. It is a game based on trust, intuition and manipulation. The suspense is Hitchcockian in nature, because the audience, unlike the participants, knows the identity of the traitors from the very beginning and follows their strategies, deceptions and intrigues with growing involvement. The format has enjoyed great international success. The final of the British version, broadcast by the BBC, reached… reached an audience of 11 million viewers and it has won several awards, including for cinematography. The Traitors Italia It achieved outstanding results: there was talk of a real “Traitors Mania”. The programme is set at Castel Valer, in Trentino, a highly evocative medieval castle with around 80 rooms.
Rooms that you used both for the scenes and, I imagine, for the production logistics as well…
For the game, only part of the castle was selected. Count Ulrico Spaur, the last resident of the castle, passed away in 2021; some rooms have remained exactly as he left them — there are still ashtrays, VHS tapes, and so on — and for this reason they were off limits to the crew. What struck me was the sheer number of doors inside the building: the possibility of accessing a room from multiple points proved extremely useful, as it allowed us to move from one space to another without interfering with the dynamics of the game.
In the programme there are two crucial phases: the “conclave”, at night, and the “round table”, during the day. Which were your cinematographic choices? for these two settings? In terms of camera placement, lighting design and the number of cameras used…
These are the central moments of the programme. In the conclave, the traitors gather to decide whom to eliminate. The round table is a moment of extremely high tension, in which all the players observe one another and try to identify the traitors. My cinematographic approach, as with every project, began with discussions with the director, Alessio Muzi. Alessio is very versatile; he has a strong cinematic sensibility and knows how to bring it into the specific context of television. So we created a hybrid language: television reality-show dynamics combined with the use of cinematic language, a combination that is not straightforward.
The conclave took place inside a tower, in an extremely confined space. From the very first location scouts, the setting conveyed a very powerful atmosphere; it simply needed to be translated visually. There was no electricity in the tower, and the imposing stone structure prevented any communication with the outside.
Filming was carried out at night, with three camera operators, the director, myself, and a small support team waiting outside. We shot at the end of the day, when the contestants were in their rooms, in a condition of fatigue and tension that was shared by the crew as well. The conclave was the moment everyone was waiting for, and even we did not know the outcome in advance: only the operator filming the name written on the parchment knew the identity of the “murdered” player, and was required to keep it secret. In a reality show, information must not circulate: a single misplaced word is enough to compromise everything.
For the round table, the set design, by Rossella Tilli, had a strong visual impact, based on the British version. The technical side had to remain completely hidden, despite the presence of several cameras and operators all around the table: the crew must never interact with the players. The contestants experience the show as something real, because in fact it is: no mobile phones, no contact with camera operators or the director. The director’s brief was to create an atmosphere not only for the audience, but also for the players. And I believe that objective was achieved.
Absolutely!
My cinematographic approach, therefore, was to create an authentic atmosphere both for the viewer and for the players. The lighting was set at night, in the absence of the players, and it was always “good on the first take”.
Within the strict rules of the format, how much freedom did you have in choosing cameras, lenses and filters? Did the format impose technical specifications or a particular shooting standard, or did you and the director have some room for manoeuvre?
Fortunately, the format did not impose technical constraints of this kind. It specified what to shoot: looks and close-ups are essential, because in a reality show it is crucial not to miss any meaningful expression. This is a defining element of the genre.
The real discussion concerned the choice of cameras, also in relation to the budget. Inside the castle there were… 35 remote cameras and 18 cameras, with 10 operators rotating shifts.. In agreement with the director, we tried to raise the overall quality level, requesting… PTZ cameras with log gamma (Panasonic 160). In Italy, a reality show had never before been produced using this kind of technology. It was an absolute first, to the extent that the service provider had to purchase the remote cameras, as they did not have them available. I had requested the the Sony FX9, because, working with dual base ISO, which would have allowed me to use less light indoors and create a more intense atmosphere for the players. In the end, a compromise was reached: I was allowed to use remote PTZ cameras with logarithmic gamma and to pair them with the FX6. Inside the castle we used cinema lenses, while photographic lenses were employed for the outdoor games. The choice of lenses fell on Canon lenses, for their warmer colour rendition, which provided a coherent base for the look defined during the creative phase.
Which Canon lenses did you use specifically?
We used the Canon CNE for the conclave, where the spaces were very confined and the lighting was limited to a small UPS. We needed a shallow depth of field, and therefore very fast lenses. For the round table, instead, we used the Canon 30–300 cine zoom.. For the trials and the outdoor games we used Canon photographic lenses. In those situations, transfer time had to be kept to an absolute minimum: the format imposes a maximum break of ten minutes between the castle and the game, to prevent the contestants from talking to one another and influencing each other. Technical movements therefore had to be almost completely eliminated. All the camera operators moved together towards the game area, and there was simply no time to transport and set up cinema zooms. I would disengage from filming in the castle about an hour and a half earlier, leaving my assistant in the control room, Alessandro Leone, to go and prepare the games. The games were planned in advance from a directorial standpoint, but the final operational adjustments were defined on the spot.
The final adjustments, of course
Yes, let’s call them adjustments, but in the first game, set in a very dark location, I used exclusively light sources placed on the ground, reflecting them upwards.
Ththe ceiling, to create a base level of lighting.
Yes. There was no time to build structures. Moreover, neither the writer nor the director wanted them, because constructing visible elements and giving the impression of something fake or reconstructed would have been a distraction for the players. From this point of view, we were free, but that freedom had to be earned. It was a struggle, but it paid off: the result has a texture very different from that of traditional television reality shows. In fact, many people asked me which camera the programme was shot on. I am very satisfied with the result.
The cinematographic approach you mentioned earlier starts from a reference to classic giallo films, but reinterpreted in a more modern and refined cinematic style, while always maintaining a dark look. The colour palette emphasises the complementary colours present in the frame. The main work was on colour density rather than saturation: the colours are very subdued. The black level, always slightly lifted, allows for a deep reading of the image without losing detail in the shadows. Low saturation avoids references to a television aesthetic with overly bright colours, while density gives body. The image feels rich and textured.
I really liked this aspect of the image: I liked the details, the subtle backlighting on the players, which placed them in relief. I don’t know whether you achieved that during shooting or in post-production: a slight cyan tint, a subtle “something” that separated them, everywhere, from breakfast to the group games. I really liked that interaction between warm and cool tones.
You’ve hit the nail on the head. The work on complementary colours was done in post-production. This split toning was developed together with the colorist Francesco D’Ascenzio. We slightly pulled cyan out of the blacks and left the highlights just amber, warmer, so that these two colours would generate a visual vibration. As for the backlighting, during shooting it was me, through a… console, constantly monitoring what was happening. We were working with a… GrandMA3, and we kept all the rooms of the castle under control in real time. Everything was live, without ever cutting away.. This is perhaps the most interesting part of the project: there was never a real “cut”. There is a visual continuity that follows the players from the morning until they leave the castle.
A single continuous sequence shot., let’s say. Very well put!
Yes, the writers would decide to follow a particular situation because they considered it important. It was flagged in the control room and I would bring it up on the monitor, subtly modulating the lighting for that close-up. There must never be any perception, inside the castle, that the lighting was changing. For this reason, it was always good on the first take: there were never any repeats, otherwise the sense of realism would have been lost.
Did you have any filters on the camera? Polarisers or diffusion filters?
I didn’t use any filters on the camera, except for the Castellana, on which we fitted Black Pro-Mist filters. to slightly soften her face. As for the windows inside the castle, I would have liked to apply neutral density filters, but it was not possible due to the continuous changes in the weather. On some days it was raining and completely dark, and shortly afterwards the sun would come out. If we had mounted ND 0.6 or ND 0.9, on rainy days the exterior would have disappeared completely. We therefore used the castle’s large windows as natural light sources. The lighting journey decided together with the director followed a temporal evolution: the morning began with large diffused sources, neutral colours and very bright lighting. In the breakfast hall, for example, there was no space where the contestants could hide; everything was exposed, as in the other rooms. As the hours passed, the light changed.
gradually, it softened, became slightly warmer, and the shadows began to lengthen. Later in the evening I introduced more point-like light sources. I would have liked to push towards a more gothic atmosphere, but here the dynamics of television reality came into play: it is necessary to always see faces clearly from every angle of the “house”, at 360 degrees. I understood and accepted this limitation. We will see whether in future editions it will be possible to take more risks. In the other versions of the format, in fact, the atmosphere is more gothic because the contestants are almost always seated. There is a precise directorial setup: they enter the room and position themselves on chairs to talk. Knowing exactly where they will stand, it is possible to work more on chiaroscuro.
Of course. In a reality game in which you have to hide and pretend, the more freedom you allow, the better it is.
Exactly: you have to guarantee maximum freedom of movement, without imposing directorial rules. You can’t tell a contestant where to sit. For this reason, in the night scenes the lighting always remains homogeneous, even though the colour temperature changes. Table lamps are switched on, some areas remain slightly more in shadow, but the entire room is still readable.
Did you shoot everything on location, or was anything rebuilt in a studio?
The format requires everything to be shot on location. There are no relocations: as I mentioned earlier, there is a maximum of ten minutes to reach the game challenges and then an immediate return to the castle. The castle is a real castle and must contain all the necessary spaces.
You mentioned that there was a different preparation for the castle interiors and the exteriors. How did the shooting setup and the cinematography change when moving from interiors to exteriors? How many cameras did you use outdoors? Were there Steadicams, drones? How did you operate in practical terms?
The level of control I had during the outdoor games was very limited. In the castle everything was managed through a lighting console; in the exterior locations, instead, the setup was organised like an ENG crew. We had eight operators and eight cameras. One camera was mounted on a Ronin. Preparation was extremely fast: barely 20 minutes. Everyone had a very precise role. One operator focused on close-ups, another on hands, another on wide shots. As soon as the players arrived, there was very little time to intervene.
I had briefed the operators in advance and followed everything from a small multiview monitor: when the director flagged a relevant situation, I would focus on that specific shot. Via radio I could give small indications. In general, I asked everyone to slightly overexpose, by about one stop. Working in log, it was important not to be afraid of overexposure.
In some games there was no artificial lighting intervention at all: I relied exclusively on the windows of the locations, as in the challenge with the breakable vases. Everything happened very quickly. It should be said that all the operators were filmmakers, people who know how to tell a story visually, highly skilled professionals. In their careers some of them also work as cinematographers, so they were able to take initiatives that were consistent with the situation. They saw the images and proposed them. If I told an operator that I needed four specific details, reminding them to always maintain a rim light or a slight backlight, they would then work in complete autonomy, delivering exactly what I had asked for.
And this was fundamental, because we were working in real time. There was never a stop to repeat a scene. Never. Great freedom of movement for the contestants, great freedom for the writers to follow what was happening live, and also for the director to move around. In some games you can even glimpse lighting fixtures, but that is part of the programme’s language. Within the game, in fact, there are the “shadows”, figures dressed in black: in some cases even a camera operator was dressed as a shadow. There was a constant interpenetration between cinematic language and television dynamics. It was great fun, and very exhausting.
How many days did you shoot for? How many were devoted to preparation and how many to production?
The planning “on paper” phase was long. First of all, we discussed the cinematographic approach: there were many meetings and many discussions. We prepared a detailed mood board to present to Amazon, and I designed the lighting plans for the entire castle. The setup phase, including set-design interventions, lasted ten days. The six episodes were shot in nine days. This meant full days of filming, from morning to night, with continuous shifts of operators and cameras. For example, if we had to shoot an evening sequence with lanterns, as soon as the round table ended we would take the contestants into a section of the castle that had already been pre-rigged. My gaffer, Elvis Pasqualwould prepare the set while we were shooting elsewhere. This is something I am particularly proud of: having managed to create such atmospheres within such tight television schedules.
A rare thing. If this were not television, if there were not this linearity, filming would be organised by locations: you would shoot the entire conclave, then the entire round table…
The paths leading up to the entrance to the conclave were shot in blocks: perhaps one day we would capture the movement with the lantern in one section, and the following day another stretch. But it was always all consecutive. One element I would have liked to use, and that I have always loved, is fire. It is a living, moving source; it makes the shadows move and has a quality on skin that I find very interesting. Inside the castle, however, it was not possible to use it. Fire could not be used in any location, except at Castel Nanno, where the challenges took place.
At the beginning I went through a bit of a crisis because the lanterns that were proposed were really awful. Thanks to Elvis, we managed to get in touch with a grip who proposed some custom-built LED lanterns. They had the right flicker and colour temperature, without gels and without any further intervention. We managed to recreate a believable atmosphere: they looked real. In fact, they were real — the only thing missing was the fire. The light you see is genuinely the light produced by the lantern.
Very beautiful indeed. You were telling me that you had some references. What kind of photographic references did you have?
At the beginning, I was shown the British and American editions and told, “This is what we have to do.” The round table is inspired by the British one, but the backgrounds are conceived in an Italian way. The British and American versions have very saturated, rich, bright colours; it’s true that at night the castle appears more gothic, but if you look closely, the contestants are almost always seated and you can sense pre-established lighting cues. The director of photography managed to create an interesting chiaroscuro. In the Italian episodes, instead, I worked mainly on colour and on chromatic differences, because the request was to always be able to see everything. There was also a cinematic reference: Saltburn., by Emerald Fennell. I drew inspiration from it. I analysed those images to understand their atmosphere, but the richness, low saturation and colour density of The Traitors Italia derives from the real impact of the castle: when you step inside, the colours simply aren’t there. In some rooms, colours were recreated for narrative needs — the purple, blue and green room — through minimal set interventions: a cushion, a table lamp, a few targeted elements. But the overall impact remains that of the authentic castle, devoid of saturated colours. We built our own look: a rougher texture, with the addition of grain in post-production. The choice to work with cyan and amber was also deliberate, to exploit elegant complementary colours capable of capturing the viewer’s attention.
Is there a scene you are particularly attached to, or one you are less satisfied with?
The first time the contestants entered the round table. There was a very powerful moment in the control room: they all stepped into that atmosphere, into that tension. We all realised it was working. Until that moment, you never really know, not until the players enter. There was no way to stop them: either it worked or it didn’t. I had never seen them in the round table before the day of filming. Each of them had a different skin tone, and each reacted differently to the light.
The light seemed rather harsh to me. There were no frost filters, right?
No, there was no intervention, neither on the camera nor on the lighting. It was a deliberate choice: hard light to recreate a refined yet raw environment. The set design had to remain slightly understated. The backgrounds are readable, but they don’t draw the eye. The director had been clear: he wanted to see the close-ups, the looks. When we filmed the contestants from the side, he wanted a more cinematic, more dramatic light. Depending on the shot, faces could be fully lit or cut by a sharp edge of light. The round table is the scene I liked the most.
What aperture were you shooting at in that situation?
The zooms were at T2.9; I was shooting at around T3.7–4. In close-ups, the backgrounds only needed to be perceived.
Yes, the backgrounds seemed to fall away.
Yes. The background was not directly lit, except for a very warm light behind the grilles, used only to slightly separate the different characters. If you look closely, there are no backlights on the contestants. In that situation, backlighting would have made the round table feel too televisual. The impact needed to be theatrical rather than cinematic, like stepping onto a stage. There, the looks were real, the tension authentic.
The sound editing was excellent: at times you can sense a person’s thoughts while still hearing the murmur of the others. The sound effects were also fundamental. I’ll tell you more: the result was so effective that even the crew couldn’t wait to get to the round table to see what would happen. When that happens, it means the programme works.
The other important scene, as I was saying, was the funeral. Because of its complexity, but above all because it was initially supposed to take place indoors, in the room of the first game, the one with the vases. It was a choice dictated by the weather: rain was forecast and that morning there were no alternative locations. Then the sky cleared and, together with the director, we decided to propose to Amazon and the writers that we do it outdoors. We decided on the spot. And in fact you can see some lighting fixtures exposed at the windows, because it wasn’t planned to shoot outside. I had no towers, I had nothing. In the end, though, it worked very well. We made use of the crypt that had already been built for another game. The atmosphere involved both the audience and the players. There were the carriage, the horse, the organ. The timing was perfect: I had in mind reaching the coffins at dusk. That’s exactly what happened, without forcing it. The timing of the funeral was its own. There was a colour intervention: the greens were desaturated, because green conveys serenity and that was not what we were looking for. But the scene is real. The impact was strong. A fundamental role was played by the costumes, designed by Arianna Urso e la scenografia di Orazio Giacoppo. Light and matter are inseparable: light does not exist without matter, and matter does not exist without light. The materials told the same story as the light.
Was it shot in the afternoon? How long did it take? A whole day?
No, it lasted about fifty minutes. The contestants left the castle and reached Castel Nanno in ten to twelve minutes. Just enough time to switch on the cameras and do a new briefing with all the operators. The level of complexity was extremely high, and I kept pressing the director: “We have to start, we have to start,” because otherwise I would have lost the soft, diffused sky light during the walk. There were no artificial lights along the route, only natural light coming from the right. At the entrance, instead, you can perceive my lighting intervention, which works within the overall visual impact of the funeral spectacle.
It’s my favourite scene as well. It’s the sequence that made me say: let’s talk to Fabrizio!
I’m very happy that you liked it. I have to say that, while we were shooting, the Amazon executives kept telling me, “Very beautiful, very beautiful.” That’s always gratifying.
One last question: is there something I haven’t asked you that you would have liked to explore further?
I often say that our job is to create an atmosphere with light and matter, but above all with shadow, with the control of shadow. If this is true, I ask myself where a product like this should be placed. Is it television or is it cinema? In television, light illuminates the show or, in some cases, becomes the protagonist. In cinema, light tells a story, it communicates emotions. The game show is a hybrid product, and my role was hybrid as well: a contamination and an interpenetration of cinematic language and television language. In Italy, I struggle to understand where a product of this kind can be positioned, whereas abroad it has been awarded numerous times, including for cinematography. Now I’ll ask you a question, and thank you. In your opinion, what role do platform-driven productions play today?
It’s a difficult question, because both natures coexist in this kind of work. In your case, I perceived a narrative approach very close to cinema, especially in the team games, the conclave and the round table. The handling of some of the castle interiors, instead, remains more televisual, with more classical setups. It’s a product that lives precisely in these two different dimensions, with rhythms that are neither those of cinema nor those of traditional television. Perhaps greater attention is needed for this type of production, also in terms of recognition. Maybe the time has come to start placing them, because projects like this are increasingly populating the platforms.
Thank you, Fabrizio. We’ll be following your future work.
