The BBC interview with Prince Harry will become one of those famous moments when television collides with the world of the royals.
It was like an emotional avalanche. It began with some stones being kicked over with questions about security and then the interview turned into a spectacular release of what seemed to be a rolling mountain of pent-up frustration and a poignant sense of separation.
The starting point was Prince Harry’s defeat in the courts as he sought to overturn a downgrading of his security in the UK. He seemed wounded. Had he decided it was time to have his say? And then really say some more?
A conversation about security was suddenly becoming about a whole range of insecurities.
Prince Harry looked upset, it seemed a cry from the heart when he said that his father “won’t speak to me because of this security stuff”, even though he didn’t know “how much longer my father has”.
This was a first-hand confirmation of the scale of the rift in the Royal Family. There was also the lack of contact between his children and their wider family in the UK. He was “gutted” and “devastated” and tired of only coming home for funerals and court cases.
And like all family rows, there was a balancing act between wanting to air grievances, to throw emotional punches, and then still want to get back together and hug and make friends.
So Prince Harry talked of the downgrading in his security in terms of this family dispute, suggesting that the Royal Household had influenced the decision, using security as leverage to keep him within the Royal Family.
Then he talked with great frankness, sounding like a slightly homesick son stuck overseas, when he spoke about wanting reconciliation. “There’s no point continuing to fight any more. Life is precious,” he said, holding out an olive branch the size of a small palace.
The “sticking point” for reconciliation is security when he visits the UK, said Prince Harry. And as well as calling on his father the King to help resolve this, he also called on the prime minister and home secretary to intervene.
At that point, it’s worth stepping away from the drama and taking a cold draught of unemotive legal air, from the judge who ruled against Prince Harry on Friday afternoon.
Sir Geoffrey Vos told the court that Prince Harry’s “sense of grievance” did not add up to the same thing as a legal argument. He upheld the decision that security arrangements had been changed because Prince Harry’s circumstances had changed, he was no longer a working royal and no longer living in the UK.
It might have annoyed Prince Harry, but the courts had again rejected his claim about unfair treatment.
There was also a response from Buckingham Palace that sounded like a weary parent.
“All of these issues have been examined repeatedly and meticulously by the courts, with the same conclusion reached on each occasion.”
It wouldn’t be right for the King to wade into issues being reviewed by the courts and considered by government departments, suggested the Palace.
While Prince Harry wore his frustration on his sleeve in this interview, you have to wonder how the rest of his family will privately respond to this outburst, with this story ricocheting around the world, on billions of mobile phones and TV screens.
These clips are going to be seen again and again. Netflix would have spun it out into a mini-series.
VE Day 80 is coming up next week, with the Royal Family prominent at commemorations. But the public might still be thinking of Prince Harry’s accusations about them. How will that work alongside messages of togetherness and unity?
Like in all families, arguments can go back a long way. And Prince Harry’s testimony was disarmingly candid, restlessly baring his feelings, and suggesting that his departure from the UK was still unresolved.
He was looking back with some uncertainty at home, and the question now will be how people at home look back at him.
Discussion about this post