Michael Jackson moonwalks into two child molestation cases and Jimmy Saville runs around like a kid dick vacuum and no one says boo.

Theroux attempts to allay his own guilt about calling Jimmy Savile a friend by trying to see if there was something he'd missed in their interactions that could've warned the journalist about the man's dark past. And there wasn't - or at least, he couldn't find it then and can't find it now. We see him interview a number of former friends and victims but there's nothing relevatory here: Savile was obviously a master at hoodwinking people, or he wouldn't have got away with what he did.

As a Canadian, the impact of Jimmy Savile's revelation was lost on me. Yes, of course I recognized that he was a terrible person, but I don't have those years of watching him to feel the "true" impact. This doc is partially about the victims, and partially about Louis' own examination of his role in not questioning Savile (or recognizing the signs). What could he have done? Maybe we should avoid saying he's "just" a creepy old man, and maybe look into things a bit deeper?

Louis admittedly was a bit hoodwinked by Savile all those years ago. Interesting hearing from the victims but not much more eye opening than that of this strange disgusting man.

Bloated. Sheds light on the superior "When Louis Met... Jimmy" documentary from 2000, but way too much time is spent navel gazing. It does give Savile's victims a chance to describe how he groomed and abused him as well as exploring how his friends deal with the fact that so many of their good memories are tied to a child rapist sociopath.

Unsure really of what to rate this. I learnt nothing but appreciated hearing victim's voices aloud, rather from paper. It made for deeply uncomfortable watching even after having read the Dame Janet Smith review in its entirety, although having been a child myself when reading the report, my view of the seriousness of the crimes may have been lessened when reading as compared to now due to my youthful immaturity and inability to understand the reality of the situation at the time.

Theroux is a little too preoccupied with the question of whether he should or shouldn't be ashamed of himself, with the consequence that the general exploration of the issues around Savile doesn't end up as thoughtful as it might have been. His quasi-conclusion that "it could only have been seen if you already knew" is less than convincing: Savile really didn't conceal that he was at the very least a lascivious opportunist.

Louis Theroux is very introspective in this story about a serial rapist/molester. Louis considers his own failings in not noticing the odd behaviour of Savile and expertly exposes the public facade of such a person.

Hard to think of anyone that does this better than Theroux. Honestly was getting a bit too weirded out during this one.

It's great to see Louis in a self reflective mode here. He just keeps getting better with time

Very well done mix of victims, 'supporters' and himself.