You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Anyone else watch this? Showing his old documentary on Savile and Louis interviewing some of his victims and people who worked with him. Was very good.
Doh wrong bit of forum.
Recorded,not yet watched - Louis is class.
Yes I watched it, in some parts where they played old footage of him and saville (the pizza place) I thought Louis looked starstruck, almost revelling in Jim's company. Also the way Saville carried on around young women really was wierd, especially on the BBC visit with Louis.
Incidentally I know a girl who Saville invited into his Rolls Royce when she was about 7 or 8, she said he sat her on his knee but nothing else happened, she didn't believe the story when it broke after his death. I've also heard a story 3rd hand which supposedly came from his ex driver who used to pick up a young lad with learning difficulties on Friday night drop him off at Saville's flat and then deliver him back home on a Sunday.
Felt Louis felt some guilt at not realising first time round. Really interesting watch.
Aunt and a cousin both new him at Stoke Mandeville and always said he was a horrible man. Now we all know why. £30 million in fund raising blinds a lot of eyes.
I think this radio interview in the early 90's made me think Saville was a *very* strange human and incredibly evasive about anything in his personal life. I remembered it for years when none of the others really made an impression. I genuinely think if we'd had social media then it would have triggered all of the allegations etc to come out - main stream media still behaved as if he was a saint but this showed a completely different side to him which they ignored.
[url= http://www.channel4.com/news/how-jimmy-savile-revealed-all-in-the-psychiatrists-chair ]http://www.channel4.com/news/how-jimmy-savile-revealed-all-in-the-psychiatrists-chair[/url]
Lots of experts out there now, isn't hindsight an amazing thing.
An old colleague from television days is a Leeds resident and had met Saville a few times, he described him as a wrong un and a deeply unpleasant man.
Saw the original Theroux documentary and what struck me was that Saville was utterly bonkers.
Will watch the new one tonight.
I still can't believe Rolf Harris is a bad un.
My mate had a girlfriend who worked in a vets that Rolf used to visit in the early 90s. She hated him and we couldn't figure how you could hate the nicest man on the planet.
Hindsight again.
The original documentary is a revealing study about how celebrity does change how your behaviour gets judged by others. LT was probably harder on him than the average interviewer, so he has little to feel guilty about.
Good watch and very insightful. It appears Saville was hiding in plain sight, with hindsight you could see the signs yet but at the time it was just Jimmy being Jimmy.
Watching his old assistant defend him was very odd too.
£30 million in fund raising blinds a lot of eyes.
Interesting really how people like Savile make such a huge deal over their charity work, which kind of suggests he was doing it all for the wrong reasons. In contrast, I didn't realise until he died that Jeremy Beadle raised around £100m for charity during his life.
Lots of experts out there now, isn't hindsight an amazing thing.
Not really hindsight. Private Eye was saying for 20 years that Savile was messing with kids. Same with Cyril Smith. No-one took them seriously, no mainstream press would touch it
What they wanted was to be sued for it, and get it all out in the open in court. But the blind eye was used instead.
Really it is.
Oooh! Look at his behaviour, look at what he said.
Funny how the same experts never spotted it the first time.
I remember the original doc, not watched htis yet, but I remember him telling a story of how they gave a guy a right doing over at a club he worked at in the early days. He came over as quite an unpleasant man.
Don't mention the duchess
I watched half of it, then turned it off. nasty man, didn't enjoy watching footage of his arrogance.
my mates stag do was Jimmy Saville themed, 15 years ago. we all went to Prague as Jimmy. His best man sent a picture to him, and my mate and his wife got a hand written card from him. it's in the bin now...
My mate had a girlfriend who worked in a vets that Rolf used to visit in the early 90s
You know what makes me furious about Rolf Harris. 19 series of Animal Hospital. NINETEEN. Not once, not even once when faced with some mangled pile of fur, gore and broken bones did he say to the vet 'Can you tell what it is yet?'
Not seen the Theroux doc yet - the only feedback I've heard so far is 'too many reaction shots from dogs'. When he was interviewed by Richard Herring a while back the subject was covered very well though - both that original documentary and Max Clifford who was in the same series and reflecting on the ways they both used threats so effectively.
I didn't really intend watching this ... but did.
I watched the original documentary and thought afterword’s Savile was a seriously dodgy bloke. I like Theroux did not realise how truly nasty and manipulative he actually was. Cringe worthy watching the footage again.
Will watch. Theroux is a quality film maker.
im. it's in the bin now...
Indeed. Saville is in Peter Kays Amarillo video for Comic Relief. Many things we cannot change unfortunately.
[quote="Drac"]Really it is.Maybe for some. Not for others.
As I mentioned the last time this came up, he was reported by two nurses I know. Both were rapidly fired (within a couple of weeks), one never worked again as she was stuck in the area with kids/husband. The other ended up in NZ. This was near enough 30 years ago.
Read an article about it the other day, and LT had expressed quite a bit if guilt about how he was indeed a bit starstruck and had befriended Saville subsequently. He made this in order give some context to it.
As Dead points out, many many folk were taken in. awful human
[i]Lots of experts out there now, isn't hindsight an amazing thing.[/i]
I don't think it is hindsight either. I was talking to my son about it, because kids of his age know the name, obviously, but not what Savile was like. I remember really despising Savile and his attempts to be funny in the original documentary - the way he used to [i]think[/i] he was being clever with his answers, but ended up sounding like a complete idiot.
The reason there was so much interest in the documentary back then, was because people wanted Louis to reveal something about Savile. That's partly why Louis feels guilty about it now, imo.
Maybe for some. Not for others.
No not all.
I watched the original he was very odd and skin crawling but astute too.
I'll be watching last night's later today.
LT has said that he'd heard rumours about Saville both from journalists and others who worked in the industry but had felt at the time he couldn't substantiate any of them, but that he was sure that he felt Saville had a "secret at his centre"
It's (unfortunately) one of those things, lots of people "know" but have no evidence sufficiently robust to do anything about it, just lots of hunches, feelings and "nearly" evidence, a much smaller group have actual evidence but are too unimportant or thin on the ground to be taken seriously, or are afraid of the repercussions if they get found out as a whistleblower or are small/unimportant enough to be steamrollered or discredited if they do say anything.
All compounded by the people at the top watching all the money come in, who are also afraid of the repercussions of getting found out, but for completely different reasons.
It's happened before, i daresay it'll happen again.
Sounds quite like the Armstrong/McQuaid/Verbruggen deal too.
LT has said that he'd heard rumours about Saville both from journalists and others who worked in the industry but had felt at the time he couldn't substantiate any of them, but that he was sure that he felt Saville had a "secret at his centre"
I think the problem is the 'rumours' at the time really manifested themselves as an in-joke. Lee and Herring told jokes about both Saville's pedophillia and his necrophillia - live on the BBC back in the early 90s. In telling them they were playing with the in-joke by edgily putting that behind the scenes joke in front of the camera - mainly because they knew the people that commissioned their show didn't really watch it. That doesn't mean they knew that he was a pedophile and corpse botherer - its means they'd heard jokes about it. If they'd have thought they were true though they'd have told the police about it rather than told jokes about it.
Wasn't the character in the Irvine Welsh book that was shagging corpses in hospitals and mortuaries supposed to be Saville? That was way back in the 90s.
Wasn't the character in the Irvine Welsh book that was shagging corpses in hospitals and mortuaries supposed to be Saville? That was way back in the 90s.
Freddy Royle. Very, very similar indeed. Both had a TV show involving often ill or vulnerable kids, both did some work at a hospital, both smoked cigars, both had some very high level connections. I remember reading it and thinking that Welsh may have well as called him Jimmy.
[i]“The thing was, Freddy brought millions of pounds into the place with his fund-raising activities. This brought kudos to the trustees, and made St Hubbin’s Hospital a flagship for the arm’s-length trusts from the NHS. All they had to do was keep schtumm and indulge Sir Freddy with the odd body.”[/i]
I've always thought Louis Theroux was a bit drippy and soft on his subjects to be frank. I never saw the original documentary and have only watched half of this one so far but I must admit his "friendship" with Savile seems a bit creepy to me. Birds of a feather and all that.
Savile always came across as a bit of a slimy weirdo to me and this film and all the revelations just confirm that. Personally I was never aware about the rumours about him when he was alive but he was always one of those people that just made my skin crawl. Russell Brand falls into that category as well.
I think LT, conciously or not, benefits from his soft and drippy exterior, people feel he's no threat and open up to him - makes him a fantastic documentarian. I felt a genuine remorse that he hadn't spotted what Saville's secret was and done anything about it. The honesty and openess of everyone involved (except Saville) is amazing.
Never liked him mainly because he appeared to be one of those celebs who was only in it for the status. Doesn't surprise me he admitted to not being particularly interested in doing charity, it was obviously just a vehicle for staying in the public eye with him.
Saw him numerous times in the Clachaig Inn in Glencoe, swanning about looking for doting people to boost his ego. I recall there was a funeral in Glencoe village and he turned up in his walking gear. I thought at the time (mid late 90's), he's just acting like (worse than) the local laird, the fact he turned up at all and showed his face, no matter how dressed, was good enough for the local peasants, and they'd be thankful of him, cos I'm Sir Jimmy. That's how I interpreted it. He'd blocked access to our house with his campervan as well, the toss pot.
He also came in my shop a few times (his brother was in the local OP home), gave him the cold shoulder because I just didn't like him, feel quite happy about that now. He stopped coming in, not sure if his brother died/was moved or because I didn't faun over him.
Also lots of rumours in Leeds about him, but only rumour. I recall watching the LT programme and expecting some revelation, but he squirmed his way around, only really reinforcing in the programme his desperate need for publicity.
The most recent stuff about him hasn't surprised me. Or maybe I just feel smug about media whore got his come-upance.
It's almost as if this lot knew back in the 80s, no?
I watched abit of the programme but it strikes me that the production company/Louis are still making more money on the back of a vile man that needs an ending now. I also think the format/Louis needs to move onto something new. I turned over.
John Lydon talked about the rumours in 1978.
I watched it too. The man was clearly the devil in human form. It’s like some sort of sick dark ironic joke looking back that he made kids dreams come true when in reality it was exactly the opposite. His public persona TV Celeb and marathon running charity worker designed to ingratiate himself to the general public so that when he was out in public people would boost his ego and he could legtimally fondle, leer and talk to women in a foul and loathsome manner. This charity worker disguise also allowed him free reign to pick and chose his victims from hospitals and care homes. He could ask the patients history from the staff pretending to be concerned so he could pick the ones that had already suffered sexual or emtional abuse knowing they would be the least likely to report him or deny his advances. I weep for those children, absolutely foul. Hard watching the tails of his abuse and his use of his catchphrase in the abuse. & the clips of his funeral with people clapping as he went by, stomach churning.
[i]John Lydon talked about the rumours in 1978.[/i]
Good on Johnny. Shame it's Piers bloody Morgan he's talking to there. Skeletons in the closet that one, I'd bet.
Just a tad ironic that auld Jonny there, once considered as all that represented the decline of "British values" appears to be a far, far better person than most other celebrities (then or contemporary). Let alone the criminal establishment inc the BBC exec etc that tried to shut him down.
more mad paedo stuff
To be fair, I didn't see all of it, but what I did see was disappointing - there's space for a serious look at that angle of the story - how intelligent, rational people were taken in for so long by such blatant depravity, but whether LT is the right man to make it, not so sure.
I've got a lot of respect for what he does, and his humble charm clearly opens doors and he had access to plenty of people who are probably pretty reluctant to talk to tv crews about JS, but I think he was too close to the story to do a great job - it ended up being just about LT's guilt really, and consequently quite self-indulgent.
I only heard of this after things came out in the media, but a friend of a friend while in her early twenties met Saville, and being married at the time, he said to her to get in touch if she ever divorced because she looked 16, which made her go from being a fan to disliking him intensely.
It's almost as if this lot knew back in the 80s, no?
The joke was that no one wanted to watch the show, it was awful. Now his dark past has come to light it changes the joke. Hindsight.
Actually my estimation of Louis has gone down; anyone who considers themself to be a documentary maker / journalist should at least have some separation between them and their subject, especially one so clearly creepy and sociopathic so to carry on this weird friendship is poor. Also the point when Louis' aunt has told him about a journo from the mail who investigated him and he didn't pursue that angle until after Jimmy's death? Either he's naive or there are still bits of the story withheld
Except the way LT works is to get rid of that separation, and as a consequence he gets people to talk to him who won't talk to other journos. It's hardly his fault that he didn't pick up something lots of other people didn't, and got conned by someone who conned lots of other people.
Interesting to note that on repeats of To The Manor Born, this advert is blurred out;
[img] 
[/img]
Though it'll make your skin crawl, it's worth watching the original again:
Many sections make so much more sense in hindsight... though there are still many questions...
The clip at 2:54 makes for interesting viewing (copy and paste if link not working in post:
[url=
Given what's come to light since the scandal 1st broke in 2012, could there be more to this 2nd clip (from 4:25) and way it's the edited into the scene after? (watch through to 6:15)
[url= http://vimeo.com/76002148#t=4m25s ]http://vimeo.com/76002148#t=4m25s[/url]
Louis: 'What do you chat about with the Queen?'
Sir Jimmy Savile OBE: 'What we chat about is a no go area'...
'I'm not a grass'
Are Planet X still displaying his bikes? That must seem like a poor investment, in retrospect.
[url= http://road.cc/content/news/62676-planet-x-bid-and-win-four-jimmy-saville-bikes-auction ]Clunk[/url]
Watched both documentaries back to back last night. The first is uncomfortable viewing with hindsight, I wonder if I'd have had the same reaction at the time. I'd like to think so, it was pretty wrong in places. His candid remarks about his "zero tolerance" policy when he thought he was off-camera was incredibly telling.
Having watched the new one, one thing that struck me was the final sequence, where he said something like "anything you want, you just let me know." The whole thing was about [i]power,[/i] wasn't it. He'd set himself up as a sort of Godfather figure, the whole "Jim'll Fix It" schtick wasn't a puff piece TV show, that's [i]how he was in real life.[/i] Mr Fixit, the head honcho, the grand fromage, building his empire of people who variously admired him, befriended him, were terrified of him, were victimised by him. Your best friend and your worst enemy.
The other thing I took away with it was, he was so very, very clever with it. Cold and masterly manipulative, and the perfect self-publicist. (I've broken my leg, quick, call a journalist!) For all JHJ's one-handed typing insistence that they were all in it together, I can't help but wonder whether they were all [i]duped[/i] together. He'd turn on the charm and people would fall under his thrall, even Queenie.
Couple of replies:
Watching his old assistant defend him was very odd too.
That felt an awful lot to me like Stockholm Syndrome. She'd served him faithfully for 28 years and then one day he'd binned her off for no discernible reason (I can only speculate that she was no longer pretty enough). She'd every right to be really bloody angry; but after 28 years? Maybe she was (is?) in love with him.
Interesting really how people like Savile make such a huge deal over their charity work, which kind of suggests he was doing it all for the wrong reasons.
I thought the same. How can anyone be a bad man when they do such wonderful work? It was pretty clear to me from the report that he wasn't buying hospital wings for the benefit of the hospital, but rather because it was a massive PR stunt for him (and a show of power). And of course, the small matter of him wanting to pop round to offer his own brand of one-on-one private counselling.
This charity worker disguise also allowed him free reign to pick and chose his victims from hospitals and care homes. He could ask the patients history from the staff pretending to be concerned so he could pick the ones that had already suffered sexual or emtional abuse knowing they would be the least likely to report him or deny his advances.
Yeah, I spotted that too; it was a common theme in the interviewed victims (though that could just be statistical chance). I did wonder whether it was no accident that they were all people likely to just go "oh well, here we go again."
I remember Esther Rantzen being interviewed about the beginnings of Children in Need, she said something along the lines of "We were told: Don't let Jimmy Savile become involved".
When does "odd" or "eccentric" or any other similar description become "creepy", "illegal", "immoral"? I saw the original documentary when it was broadcast. Odd? From the sixties? Could have been drugs but of course we now know it wasn't that.
Never met him nor do I know anyone who met him, just had a feeling he wasn't "right", got told he did a lot for charity.
Not the best advert for Oakleys.