What do you think?
Rate this book
Jack the Ripper: The final solution
Who really was Jack the Ripper? Was he a solitary assassin lurking in the shadows of gaslit London? Or was Jack the Ripper three two killers and an accomplice? In this work the author investigates all aspects of this strange case shrouded in mystery and misconception. The discovery of the murders is described by the men who were there, and evidence reveals that the hitherto unsolved Ripper murders were in fact a culmination of a full-scale cover-up organized at the highest level of government.
286 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1976
12 people are currently reading
697 people want to read
About the author
Stephen Knight
5 books7 followersStephen Knight was born in Hainault, Essex in 1951. He left school at sixteen to pursue a career as a journalist. He was a reporter on several weekly London papers and by age 20 had become chief reporter of one of them. In 1973, Knight met a man who claimed to know the truth behind the Jack the Ripper murders. Knight investigated the case, obtaining access to previously closed files of the Home Office and Scotland Yard. This led to his first book, the bestselling nonfiction work Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution. His first and only novel, Requiem at Rogano, appeared in 1979 to generally positive reviews, and a further nonfiction work, The Brotherhood, purporting to expose the secrets of the Freemasons, appeared in 1984.
In 1977, Knight began to suffer from epileptic seizures, and in 1980 he agreed to take part in a BBC documentary on epilepsy after seeing an advertisement in the newspaper. As part of the television program, a brain scan was taken, which revealed a brain tumor. Though surgeons removed the tumor, it recurred four years later, and Knight died in 1985 at age 33.
In 1977, Knight began to suffer from epileptic seizures, and in 1980 he agreed to take part in a BBC documentary on epilepsy after seeing an advertisement in the newspaper. As part of the television program, a brain scan was taken, which revealed a brain tumor. Though surgeons removed the tumor, it recurred four years later, and Knight died in 1985 at age 33.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
October 14, 2007
As a long time "Ripperologist," I find almost any book about the murders attributed to Jack The Ripper to be of interest. This one is probably my personal favorite, although most researchers dismiss it out of hand. Author Stephen Knight postulated a complex conspiracy theory to explain the Ripper slayings. Basically, he theorized that the prostitutes were murdered in order to protect Eddy, the Duke of Clarence (and next in line for the English throne), whose secret love child had been born to the last of the victims, Mary Kelly. Knight postulates that the Freemasons were involved as well, and finds significance and symbolism behind the seemingly random nature of the killings. The movie "From Hell," starring Johnny Depp, was loosely based on Knight's book. While Knight's theory may be outlandish and/or far-fetched, it makes for a very compelling story.
September 14, 2007
This book is the basis for the Alan Moore comic (and thus - loosely - the lamentable Johnny Depp vehicle) From Hell, and as an appreciator of the comic, I figured I would never have an reason to bother reading the original history it was based on. Then I ran into it one Saturday in a used bookstore, and what can I say, I'm a sucker for old paperbooks.
Stephen Knight gives a journalistic account of the Ripper murders, which is to say he acquaints you with a lot of the facts of the case, while also making a sustained argument for his particular (and particularly outlandish) interpretation of their meaning. I'm given to understand this is widely discredited now as being a product of his (and his main informant's) paranoias about the Freemasons, albeit bringing to light some formerly overlooked facts of the case in the process. Regardless of all these details about being a "plausible" or "historical" account, Knight tells a damn good story, and for my money the most entertaining explanation of the Ripper murders you're likely to find. If you're bothered by the thought that it's hard to see the truth for Knight's theory, then maybe you shouldn't be reading a book about Jack the Ripper. Knight rightly points out that a century removed from the crimes we're no closer to the truth mostly because of authors overlooking facts because of their own attachment to theories (which Knight points out, mind you, before giving his own biased version of the facts). I long ago settled my unease about this by reading Alan Moore's brilliant 2nd appendix to From Hell - an illustrated account of the Ripper historiography (no, seriously, it's awesome) - and thus I'm content to read a book like Knight's without worrying too much about whether it's true.
Stephen Knight gives a journalistic account of the Ripper murders, which is to say he acquaints you with a lot of the facts of the case, while also making a sustained argument for his particular (and particularly outlandish) interpretation of their meaning. I'm given to understand this is widely discredited now as being a product of his (and his main informant's) paranoias about the Freemasons, albeit bringing to light some formerly overlooked facts of the case in the process. Regardless of all these details about being a "plausible" or "historical" account, Knight tells a damn good story, and for my money the most entertaining explanation of the Ripper murders you're likely to find. If you're bothered by the thought that it's hard to see the truth for Knight's theory, then maybe you shouldn't be reading a book about Jack the Ripper. Knight rightly points out that a century removed from the crimes we're no closer to the truth mostly because of authors overlooking facts because of their own attachment to theories (which Knight points out, mind you, before giving his own biased version of the facts). I long ago settled my unease about this by reading Alan Moore's brilliant 2nd appendix to From Hell - an illustrated account of the Ripper historiography (no, seriously, it's awesome) - and thus I'm content to read a book like Knight's without worrying too much about whether it's true.
January 23, 2016
Overwhelming! The author started with a crazy story told to him by an elderly man, decided to look into it, and virtually re-investigated the entire Jack The Ripper case. The answers he came up with tie up every loose end and unlikely suspect I ever heard of related to the events of 1888 -- and every Ripperologist knows there are many of those indeed. Alas, every word of it is crap, but that doesn't mean it isn't my favorite theory to date. Patricia Cornwell shamelessly ripped off Stephen Knight's hard work in her own, much sillier and less likely solution to the Ripper case.
February 3, 2017
Knight wrote a rather interesting book on the Freemasons ('The Brotherhood'), this book is interesting, but its conclusions have been shattered by contemporary evidence. The late Mr. Knight writes well, though, and it is the basis for so many people believing the Royal Family were involved. Misguided, but still worth a read, oddly.
June 19, 2016
All the known facts are interwoven into a theory that points to Royal involvement in the ripper story. It's quite a convincing tale but somewhat fanciful. Not, in my opinion, the final solution but a fun one. The comic book and film "From Hell" draw in this theory too.
August 28, 2022
I recently became interested in the Jack the Ripper case. Stephen Knight's theory dominates depictions of the case on film and television, which is a shame, because the theory is a totally implausible, highly speculative conspiracy theory. If you are looking for fan-fiction about Jack the Ripper, you will probably enjoy this book. If you're interested in facts, this book will only confuse and distract you.
April 16, 2019
Stephen Knight has written a very engrossing book that sheds some light on murder suspect Walter Sickert, but then proposes many outlandish and wild theories that do little if any justice for the victims. There is no proof at all that Sickert was a member of the Freemasons or even the Hermetic Order Of The Golden Dawn. Whether Joseph Gordon (who claims his real name is Joseph Sickert) is really the son of Walter Sickert or not cannot be proven. And if Sickert was truly evil, as this theory originally proposes, he would have tried to cast blame on the innocent and hide his own guilt in the end by telling lies and not the truth...
September 12, 2009
Basically the Royal/Freemason conspiracy which became the basis of alan Moores from hell, a fun read if discredited and at least as likely as the Patricia Cornell one, In fact good old Walter Sickert features in both!!
December 29, 2024
This book, as everyone knows, was the basis for Alan Moore and Eddie Campbell’s classic From Hell. And, like most normal well-adjusted folks, after reading the graphic novel I hadn’t had enough of Saucy Jack and had to delve into this bit of completionism. The results were mixed.
I don’t read conspiracy theory as anything but another genre of fiction, the same as news, or non-fiction. All writing is a sub-genre of fantasy. So it wasn’t about believing, but I’m still interested in a well-reasoned case. In fact, in order for a non-fiction book to be aesthetically pleasing (the only way it can be), the case must be well-reasoned. Non-fic, like documentary film, lives and dies on how it presents the case; the "narrative" is as important as in any fictional tale.
The basic setup here, first delivered by Sickert (not the awesomely creepy painter but the child of said artist), of a lovechild born to the crown prince of England, and the crown’s moves to cover it up, were suitably intriguing—especially considering the literary nature of so ghastly a killer and his crimes—so I was here for the display of evidence. I always find the investigation to be the best part of any True Crime mystery, anyway. The investigative reporting done by Knight however wasn’t all that convincing or even coherently conveyed. But to be fair, coherence isn’t always the best part of the investigation. . . . . .
Walter Sickert, Gallery of the Old Bedford, 1894-5, purchased by the Walker Art Gallery in 1947
Moore in From Hell has a bit at the end about the “spirit” of Jack the Ripper appearing now and again throughout history, almost ascribing a preternatural force to the killer(s) that has more agency than any of the human vessels picked to carry out the murders themselves. A truly freaky thought, because it ascribes a malevolent super-nature, which implies the possibility of a malevolent God. Moore is brilliant in how he takes the investigative strands of a wild theory and pulls them together in a literary way, but this particular isntance, of the re-appearing spirit, is what spooks me. Especially when considering the similarities I’ve always found between Saucy Jack and his 20th Century counterpart, Le Zodiac.
You can get lost in the maze of coincidences (which is part of the fun), but I’ll focus on one thing that got the goosepimples tingling: namely, the psychic in each case who said they had seen what the killer looked like and could pick him out in a crowd.
Robert James Lees, a charlatan according to Moore, said the he had “impressions” of the victims being killed, knew when there would be another one, and most astonishingly said that he was on an omnibus one day when Jack the Ripper himself showed up. He followed the man, or so goes his version of events, pleaded with police and finally convinced a streetcop to knock on the suspect’s (Sir William Gull) door! Once inside, Gull had the audacity to admit that he had spells where he would black out and wake up in strange places, and tolf of one time when he awoke to find he was covered in blood!
Does this not remind you of Toschey and Armstrong interviewing Arthur Lee Allen, when the dude, sporting his Zodiac watch, seems to flaunt how close he can come to admitting it without giving them anything?!
The psychic in the Zodiac case was Joseph DeLouise, who seemed to be psychic in the same way as Lees, in that he received “impressions” and had to make sense of them, or mostly left others do to so. There’s a whole chapter in DeLouise’s book Psychic Mission given to his trying to identify Zodiac, and if the cops would have taken him more seriously, who knows?
Lees and DeLouise, psychics or charlatans?
Gull is definitely an A.L.A.-level suspect in the Ripper case. They even eerily have a similar kind of appearance and build. The fact that investigators like Greysmith mention a British-ness to Zodiac and his letters is another coincidence, as are the letters themselves; even the fact that both wrote letters to the police and got away with it! Both had five canonical victims but rumors of many more! Both cut bloody cloth away from their fifth victim! Both sent evidence along with letters to the police! Both. . . . .
I’m gunna stop now, before I get sucked down the rabbit hole yet again. But it is tempting……
I don’t read conspiracy theory as anything but another genre of fiction, the same as news, or non-fiction. All writing is a sub-genre of fantasy. So it wasn’t about believing, but I’m still interested in a well-reasoned case. In fact, in order for a non-fiction book to be aesthetically pleasing (the only way it can be), the case must be well-reasoned. Non-fic, like documentary film, lives and dies on how it presents the case; the "narrative" is as important as in any fictional tale.
The basic setup here, first delivered by Sickert (not the awesomely creepy painter but the child of said artist), of a lovechild born to the crown prince of England, and the crown’s moves to cover it up, were suitably intriguing—especially considering the literary nature of so ghastly a killer and his crimes—so I was here for the display of evidence. I always find the investigation to be the best part of any True Crime mystery, anyway. The investigative reporting done by Knight however wasn’t all that convincing or even coherently conveyed. But to be fair, coherence isn’t always the best part of the investigation. . . . . .
Walter Sickert, Gallery of the Old Bedford, 1894-5, purchased by the Walker Art Gallery in 1947
Moore in From Hell has a bit at the end about the “spirit” of Jack the Ripper appearing now and again throughout history, almost ascribing a preternatural force to the killer(s) that has more agency than any of the human vessels picked to carry out the murders themselves. A truly freaky thought, because it ascribes a malevolent super-nature, which implies the possibility of a malevolent God. Moore is brilliant in how he takes the investigative strands of a wild theory and pulls them together in a literary way, but this particular isntance, of the re-appearing spirit, is what spooks me. Especially when considering the similarities I’ve always found between Saucy Jack and his 20th Century counterpart, Le Zodiac.
You can get lost in the maze of coincidences (which is part of the fun), but I’ll focus on one thing that got the goosepimples tingling: namely, the psychic in each case who said they had seen what the killer looked like and could pick him out in a crowd.
Robert James Lees, a charlatan according to Moore, said the he had “impressions” of the victims being killed, knew when there would be another one, and most astonishingly said that he was on an omnibus one day when Jack the Ripper himself showed up. He followed the man, or so goes his version of events, pleaded with police and finally convinced a streetcop to knock on the suspect’s (Sir William Gull) door! Once inside, Gull had the audacity to admit that he had spells where he would black out and wake up in strange places, and tolf of one time when he awoke to find he was covered in blood!
Does this not remind you of Toschey and Armstrong interviewing Arthur Lee Allen, when the dude, sporting his Zodiac watch, seems to flaunt how close he can come to admitting it without giving them anything?!
The psychic in the Zodiac case was Joseph DeLouise, who seemed to be psychic in the same way as Lees, in that he received “impressions” and had to make sense of them, or mostly left others do to so. There’s a whole chapter in DeLouise’s book Psychic Mission given to his trying to identify Zodiac, and if the cops would have taken him more seriously, who knows?
Lees and DeLouise, psychics or charlatans?
Gull is definitely an A.L.A.-level suspect in the Ripper case. They even eerily have a similar kind of appearance and build. The fact that investigators like Greysmith mention a British-ness to Zodiac and his letters is another coincidence, as are the letters themselves; even the fact that both wrote letters to the police and got away with it! Both had five canonical victims but rumors of many more! Both cut bloody cloth away from their fifth victim! Both sent evidence along with letters to the police! Both. . . . .
I’m gunna stop now, before I get sucked down the rabbit hole yet again. But it is tempting……
April 14, 2023
Proceed with caution! While this book will no doubt hold your attention until the end, I recommend you not take the so-called facts too seriously. Despite that old saying about fact being stranger than fiction, in truth, it's often more boring. Therefore, a little dose of imagination and truth stretching never hurt anyone wanting to make their book sell.
Are we really supposed to believe that a group of streetwalkers from London's east end, who have to sleep during the day, so they'll have enough energy to stroll the sidewalks at night, and work up fake enthusiasm for any horny guy with a few coins to spare, would have the time (as well as the smarts) to come up with a blackmail scheme that involves the Royal Family itself????
Really????
Not to mention Freemasons, a well-known though mentally unstable physician, publicly prominent men and an obsessive artist, each involved in their own way???
Read this for an interesting and entertaining story, but don't confuse fact and fiction.
Are we really supposed to believe that a group of streetwalkers from London's east end, who have to sleep during the day, so they'll have enough energy to stroll the sidewalks at night, and work up fake enthusiasm for any horny guy with a few coins to spare, would have the time (as well as the smarts) to come up with a blackmail scheme that involves the Royal Family itself????
Really????
Not to mention Freemasons, a well-known though mentally unstable physician, publicly prominent men and an obsessive artist, each involved in their own way???
Read this for an interesting and entertaining story, but don't confuse fact and fiction.
March 30, 2025
Ensayo conspiranoico sobre los crímenes de Jack el Destripador. La justificación de dicha teoría es que fueron crímenes masónicos para encubrir un escándalo del heredero al trono que, según el autor, de destaparse haría caer la monarquía y el orden establecido (todos los implicados según esta teoria son masones, comisarios, forenses, el primer ministro, el heredero al trono, el propio asesino, etc).
Como relato de ficción estilo From Hell (de Alan Moore, recomendable leer esta novela gráfica después del libro de Knight) está bien, sin embargo el autor se cree que es la verdad en este caso.
Muy hábil al desmontar las teorías anteriores como la de M. J. Druitt de Tom Cullen en "Otoño de terror", y sin embargo, comete el mismo error al fundar su teoría conspiranoica sobre suposiciones y la fábula contada por el hijo de Walter Sickert, que más que otra cosa apunta a este mismo como implicado en la trama.
Mala traducción realizada con Google.
Como relato de ficción estilo From Hell (de Alan Moore, recomendable leer esta novela gráfica después del libro de Knight) está bien, sin embargo el autor se cree que es la verdad en este caso.
Muy hábil al desmontar las teorías anteriores como la de M. J. Druitt de Tom Cullen en "Otoño de terror", y sin embargo, comete el mismo error al fundar su teoría conspiranoica sobre suposiciones y la fábula contada por el hijo de Walter Sickert, que más que otra cosa apunta a este mismo como implicado en la trama.
Mala traducción realizada con Google.
September 1, 2022
Knight is either deeply credulous or deeply manipulative - either he was fooled by a fantasist's claims about the Ripper murders, or was exploitative enough to latch onto them and push them even harder than the original hoaxer intended.
Notable mostly for being the inspiration for Alan Moore's From Hell, even Moore had to dial back some of the more extreme and absurd claims in here - like the part which alleges that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, an infamous antisemitic forgery, has some form of validity. It is either a grim coincidence or an especially sick joke that Knight should give a book which tries to smuggle that bilge back into the realm of credibility the subtitle "the Final Solution".
Full review: https://fakegeekboy.wordpress.com/201...
Notable mostly for being the inspiration for Alan Moore's From Hell, even Moore had to dial back some of the more extreme and absurd claims in here - like the part which alleges that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, an infamous antisemitic forgery, has some form of validity. It is either a grim coincidence or an especially sick joke that Knight should give a book which tries to smuggle that bilge back into the realm of credibility the subtitle "the Final Solution".
Full review: https://fakegeekboy.wordpress.com/201...
March 13, 2023
Total nonsense. As absurd a nitwit theory as the one put forward by Bruce Robinson in They All Love Jack, and that's saying something. According to writer Philip Sugden, prior to publication Knight already knew that his research was flawed, and his main source later acknowledged that he had sold the author a complete hoax.
The book is now widely discredited by serious ripper scholars. Even the gullible Colin Wilson thought it nonsense, although it didn't prevent his quote 'Mr Knight held my fascinated attention every single step of the way', published in Books and Bookmen. Do writers get paid for endorsing books that they actually think are crap?
The story is even more nonsensical than Patricia Cornwell's Portrait of a Killer, which is also based on the same dopey Walter Sickert connection. Basically it's just bullshit.
The book is now widely discredited by serious ripper scholars. Even the gullible Colin Wilson thought it nonsense, although it didn't prevent his quote 'Mr Knight held my fascinated attention every single step of the way', published in Books and Bookmen. Do writers get paid for endorsing books that they actually think are crap?
The story is even more nonsensical than Patricia Cornwell's Portrait of a Killer, which is also based on the same dopey Walter Sickert connection. Basically it's just bullshit.
September 7, 2021
Read it as entertainment and you won't be disappointed. Don't take the title too literally. its A final solution, not THE final solution. And an implausible, if ingenious, solution at that. For fans of conspiracy theories, this one's a corker. High on speculation and leaps of logic, low on believability. But Knight puts forward his arguments with gusto and confidence. He writes well, and this is an engrossing book. Did it bring me round to his ideas on the Ripper's identity? Not at all. However, if you enjoyed the film/comic book From Hell, you may be interested to see the main source of inspiration.
July 5, 2025
Probably a bold statement to call your book The Final Solution. It would have been better to call it A Solution as it can be put on the pile of books by differing authors all with there ideas of who Jack The Ripper was and how they came about their conclusions.
That aside I found this book an interesting read. The author does make a strong case for who was responsible for the killings. And if you remove Walter Sickert from the book it reads like the plot for the TV drama that starred Micheal Caine.
The truth is we will never know who Jack The Ripper was and the list of possible candidates is more likely to grow as time goes on.
That aside I found this book an interesting read. The author does make a strong case for who was responsible for the killings. And if you remove Walter Sickert from the book it reads like the plot for the TV drama that starred Micheal Caine.
The truth is we will never know who Jack The Ripper was and the list of possible candidates is more likely to grow as time goes on.
June 18, 2023
There are many very interesting facts in this book. There are also many interesting fabrications/interpretations. Reading it as though it were a fiction novel laced with real facts makes it much more enjoyable. Knight loves the words doubtless and inescapable, he used them so often it’s very much like Vizzini from Princess Bride and his “inconceivable!”
Don’t take the book too seriously and it’s a thoroughly enjoyable read that does describe many real instances throughout the history of Whitechapel at the time.
I do have to say that the last 10 or so pages are the most enjoyable.
Don’t take the book too seriously and it’s a thoroughly enjoyable read that does describe many real instances throughout the history of Whitechapel at the time.
I do have to say that the last 10 or so pages are the most enjoyable.
January 4, 2024
I didn't find this "solution" very compelling or plausible at all. The solution might capture the publics attention and indeed it did but to anybody with any knowledge of the case would know that nothing here matches or comes anywhere near the contemporary eyewitnesses reports.
This imaginative solution for the jack the ripper crimes is quite sensational but not helpful in getting any nearer to the truth.
This imaginative solution for the jack the ripper crimes is quite sensational but not helpful in getting any nearer to the truth.
March 14, 2021
A fascinating book that includes a lot of evidence, which of course will need checking further. The one aspect of this book I didn’t care for was how the author trashes other books. I believe all theories should be explored.
Overall a fascinating read that makes a lot of sense, but still leaves questions unanswered.
Overall a fascinating read that makes a lot of sense, but still leaves questions unanswered.
October 24, 2018
Hugely outlandish and far fetched, but nonetheless a wonderfully entertaining read.
February 28, 2019
Read this many years ago, found it fascinating
August 26, 2020
An interesting take on the Jack the Ripper murders. A quick read.
December 21, 2020
Intriguing, but better with pictures.
September 19, 2022
It was a fun read.
November 2, 2024
Great book, tremendous research... It only took 150 years to solve this one!!
I guess we shouldn't feel bad about JFK, RFK, zodiac or Black dahlia...
I guess we shouldn't feel bad about JFK, RFK, zodiac or Black dahlia...
December 24, 2024
Bit too much of an eye-opener as I have an ancestral link to the ‘Doctor’…. After reading this excellent book, I don’t think such a connection is anything to write home about….
December 24, 2024
I read this in paperback circa 1980... Meh...
January 4, 2026
Love this theory !
November 17, 2014
This book was my travel companion when I walked those mysterious streets of Whitechapel, in 1989. For as long as I could remember, I had always been fascinated by the story of Jack The Ripper. So, when I made my first trip to London, Whitechapel was a must for me. I didn't do a tour, I wanted to experience it all for myself first hand. Stephen Knight's book was a perfect road map for me, and it even helped me find Sir William Gull's grave in the tiny churchyard cemetery, in Thorpe-Le-Soken, in Essex. While I look back on the book today and realize, it's pretty much all hogwash, it still provides solid details to locations, the players involved and does present a compelling argument. This book sits proudly in my library along side all my other collections of book on the subject of Jack The Ripper.
December 1, 2008
Crazy-ass theory attributing the Whitchapel murders to none other than Queen Victoria's physician extraordinary Sir William Withey Gull. Inspired the FABULOUS Alan Moore/Eddie Campbell graphic novel collaboration "From Hell" (which also spawned a mediocre feature film of the same name. Sure, Johnny Depp starred, but it was all downhill after the opening credits. Heather Graham, though cute-as-a-button, is something of a stretch as a hard-scrabble, East end prostitute/love interest...).
Murder, mutilation, conspiracy/cover-up, architecture, Free Masons... what's not to like?
Murder, mutilation, conspiracy/cover-up, architecture, Free Masons... what's not to like?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 7, 2016
Μια ''συνομωσιολογικη'' και ενδιαφερουσα αν και μαλλον μη αληθης θεωρια για τον θρυλικο ψυχοπαθη serial killer της Βρετανιας. Ο Stephen Knight διατυπωνει τη θεωρια οτι ο δολοφονος πισω απο το ψευδωνυμο ''Τζακ ο Αντεροβγαλτης'' δεν ηταν ενας μανιακος και μοναχικος ''θρησκοληπτος'' δολοφονος κι οτι δεν ηταν μονος του αλλα οτι επροκειτο για μια συνομωσια πολλων ατομων που συνεδεε τη βασιλικη Οικογενεια της Βικτωριας, τους τεκντονες και τον ζωγραφο Walter Sickert. Για τον Stephen knight οι δολοφονιες εγιναν προκειμενου να καλυφθει ο μυστικος γαμος μεταξυ του δευτεροτοκου διαδοχου στο θρονο του πριγκιπα Albert Victor και της προλεταριας Annie Elizabeth Crook!!!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews