The Elgin Marbles (Saturday BBC2); Stars In Their Eyes - Celebrity Special (Saturday ITV1): WAS Thomas Bruce, the seventh earl of Elgin, a common thief or a man concerned with saving historic art that would otherwise have been lost to the world?

The Elgin Marbles used many of the tricks we have come to expect from historical documentaries. There were dramatic reconstructions, computer-generated images and comments from people in the know.

There is no denying employing actors does make history come alive and become more accessible, but there have been so many shows relying on snippets of costume drama that they have all started to look the same.

Last night, we saw Lord Elgin as a broken man, trying to justify why he took the marble friezes out of Athens and installed them in London. He claimed he had permission but the row over his actions has raged for 200 years.

In the 1800s, when Elgin decided he liked the look of the marbles, the world was in the grip of Greco mania, and the impression was given that he wanted to collect his own souvenirs from the trendiest place on earth. But modern-day experts are split over whether he was unscrupulous or just over-enthusiastic when he whipped out the heart of the Parthenon.

Would the marbles have been destroyed if he hadn't removed them or did he just loot and split up a country's collection of art? As the remains of the friezes are still in Athens, it seems bizarre to suggest that Elgin saved the images by taking them out of the country - in fact, we have been left with two halves of a jigsaw that should really be reunited.

But some experts are using the most bizarre logic to suggest that the marbles should stay in London. They think that until Athens can prove it will care for them, it shouldn't be allowed to have them. This is like a car thief refusing to return his loot unless the owner promises to clean his motor regularly.

Is it really our place to say when a country is in a position to look after something which was taken from it with dubious consent?

Before I watched this programme, I had heard of the Elgin Marbles but had no knowledge of them or opinion on their future. In just over an hour, I found myself caught up in the debate which is set to rage on for years - surely the sign of a powerful and engaging programme.

There were more questions to be answered on Sunday with EastEnders omnibus and the dreadful fairground incident of 2004.

Why did it take the emergency services so long to get to the scene when four police cars arrived in Albert Square in a matter of seconds when Janine decided to skip bail?

Who taught Den Watts first aid or put him in charge of major disaster situations, and why did Dennis think picking up young Steven, who had a suspected broken back, was a good idea?

As usual, the Enders scriptwriters asked us to suspend disbelief as they used the fairground accident as an excuse to put Pauline and Dot's feud behind them, get Kat and Alfie back together, pull Garry and Lynne apart and even find Ian a new woman.

It was obvious as soon as the bolshy chippy owner had an argument with that lady over loose change that fate (or some very contrived storyline) was going to throw the two of them together.

All the soaps have had their big disaster sequences - they are an easy way to put an end to dull storylines and tie up loose ends, but if that is the case why didn't the slide wipe out the Ferreira clan - surely the most unpopular and useless soap family since the Harts in Family Affairs who met their fate in a canal boat explosion - they've been warned!

Published: 28/06/2004