42 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 47.9 ms ] thread
He is still Archie Bunker's annoying son in law to me. I hear he did some interesting things since then though.

My best friend died in a family murder like this. A decade later the wounds of the survivors haven't healed.

At least Carl didn't live to suffer this.

Mel Brooks is gonna be sad.
Before I realized that his father Carl died a few years ago, I wondered how he was dealing with this.
Three great movies that he directed that everyone around my age would be relatively intimately familiar with: This Is Spinal Tap, The Princess Bride and When Harry Met Sally

> Police are treating the deaths as apparent homicides. According to the L.A. Times, authorities have questioned a member of Reiner’s family in connection with the death. As of Sunday night, the LAPD have not officially identified a suspect, but Rolling Stone has confirmed that Reiner’s son, Nick, was involved in the homicide. A source confirmed to Rolling Stone that the couple’s daughter, Romy, found her parents’ bodies.

Alternative source:

> Senior law enforcement officials report that both had stab wounds

Tragic.

Reportedly killed by their son, who had struggled with addiction: https://people.com/rob-reiner-wife-michele-were-killed-by-so...

> In a 2016 interview with PEOPLE, Nick spoke about his years-long struggle with drug addiction, which began in his early teens and eventually left him living on the streets. He said he cycled in and out of rehab beginning around age 15, but as his addiction escalated, he drifted farther from home and spent significant stretches homeless in multiple states.

Rob Reiner directed a movie from a semi-autobiographical script his son co-wrote a few years ago. Hard to imagine many things worse than going through the pain of having a kid who seemed lost, getting him back, and then whatever must have been going on more recently that apparently led to this.

> Hard to imagine many things worse than going through the pain of having a kid who seemed lost, getting him back, and then whatever must have been going on more recently that apparently led to this

Also worth considering that Rob Reiner might have played his part in the roots of Nick's troubles ... after all Rob was his father and the drug problems started when he was still a child.

Are you a parent? Do you understand the challenges of parenting that includes the fact that "controlling" your child is ultimately impossible?

Yes, you can be attentive and engaged, ensure they're mentored and guided, are given discipline and instruction, etc. But they're still autonomous units that are going to do what the fuck they want to do.

Of course there are cases of abuse that can damage a child but that should not be a base assumption in this case (his other children appear to be fine).

Jesus Christ. "When Harry met Sally" is easily the best romcom of all times.
Completely tragic. Rob Reiner's movies brought so much good into people's lives. The Princess Bride still remains a favorite. Today is a very sad and inconceivable end.
So sad. To me, he's primarily the "Spinal Tap" guy, but he did so much more.
I remember him as Meathead, and my 22-year-old son remembers him as the dad from Wolf of Wall Street. It's really amazing how many generations his work spans.
I'd forgotten what an unusually strong and culturally-resonant line of movies the man had without (I think) the popular acclaim you might associate with them, like a low-profile Spielberg.

Spinal Tap

The Princess Bride

When Harry Met Sally

Sleepless in Seattle

Stand By Me

etc

A great loss, RIP

I had the same thought when I looked up his filmography - highly underrated. No idea he made all those classics.
Thanks for The Princess Bride and Sleepless in Seattle. Rest in peace.
Rest in peace. "The Princess Bride" is a really fun, unique and beautiful piece of art that my wife and I revisit all the time. Nobody deserves to go like this and he'll be missed.
“What da fu*k you sayin? Jordan, are you f*ckin’ high?!”

RIP

FWIW, if you have HBOMax, you can watch what is now, sadly, his final film, Spinal Tap 2. It just arrived there yesterday.

(They also just got the original if you want to watch it again)

This is very sad news.

No one else has mentioned it but among all his other great performances his hair-trigger angry dad in Wolf of Wall Street is hilarious.

I think being able to be both funny in his anger but also a bit intimidating and then go to being a warm father figure is something he would not have been able to portray without genuine charisma.

Terrible. I enjoyed many of his films, and count Spinal Tap, Misery and Stand by Me among my favourites. Rest in Peace!
Oh dang. Last night before falling asleep my wife told me "some guy from Spinal Tap died" while scrolling on her phone. Didn't think much of it.

Wake up and first thing I do is read this...

Rob Reiner? Really? What a terrible shame. What a loss. His films and even his time on All in the Family really helped shape the cultural landscape.

Nothing had as large an impact on my sense of humor growing up as This is Spinal Tap. Just thinking about the movie now I chuckle to myself. Most of his other films are certified classics.

He will be greatly missed.

Well that's just terrible. I went to a trade school for learning audio engineering. One of the instructors always used a day to show "Spinal Tap" to his class. I didn't realize it was fiction for about the first 40m. The guy made some great films.
I just watched Spinal Tap 2 last week and enjoyed it.

RIP Rob and Michelle.

(comment deleted)
I only knew him from directing Harry Met Sally and Wolf of Wall street where almost all of his scenes are hillarious, especially the one where he burst into the room abusing DiCaprio and his gang over expenses.

RIP.

As an aside, it's been fascinating reading the comments here about news media.

People want journalists to publish quickly AND only publish what’s fully verified.

They want anonymous sources named "in the spirit of truth," without grappling with the reality that doing so would instantly dry up anyone risking their job, or worse, to provide information.

They expect journalists to release raw information as soon as they have it, while simultaneously acting as perfect filters; never amplifying rumors, or being wrong, even as new facts emerge.

They want neutrality, except when neutrality conflicts with their priors.

It's no wonder that morale among journalists is at an all-time low. Is any other profession held to such an impossible standard?

> People want journalists to publish quickly AND only publish what’s fully verified.

Not contradictory. People want information to be verified quickly. That's the job. The person who can do it the fastest gets the scoop. Publishing unverified stuff isn't doing the job faster, it's not doing the job. You can get away with cheating for a bit, as you can probably guess what's going to wind up getting verified most of the time, but that's all the more reason to punish cheaters when they eventually are caught.

And even then, publishing rumors and speculation are fine so long as they are clearly noted as such. It is only when unverified statements are treated as facts that there is a problem.

> They want anonymous sources named "in the spirit of truth," without grappling with the reality that doing so would instantly dry up anyone risking their job, or worse, to provide information.

You're not supposed to cite an anonymous source saying there are bodies buried; you're supposed to learn where the bodies are buried from the anonymous sources and then show the bodies as evidence. There is no need for an appeal to authority when you have proof. If a story relies on cited sources they should be named, and if no one is willing to go on the record then you shouldn't be relying on cited sources.

Also we should be pushing for strong whistleblower protections, especially reporting when whistleblowers are retaliated against.

> They expect journalists to release raw information as soon as they have it, while simultaneously acting as perfect filters

Who is asking for either raw data streams or that the news act as filters? People expect evidence (ie things that can be verified) and analysis (ie context for the evidence presented). Omitting unreliable evidence is fine, but people complain when the standard for reliable evidence changes without good reason.

> never amplifying rumors, or being wrong, even as new facts emerge.

If you publish actual facts, they will remain facts no matter what new facts emerge. Truth never contradicts truth, it only expands the story. It is perfectly fine to have incomplete facts, you better have a damn good reason if you have false facts.

> They want neutrality, except when neutrality conflicts with their priors.

No one wants neutrality, they want integrity. You can enthusiastically report that your side is right any day of the week so long as you're also willing to report when they're wrong. It's when evidence is chosen to fit the narrative rather than the narrative developed around the evidence that there's a problem.

> It's no wonder that morale among journalists is at an all-time low.

Morale should be low in an industry driven to compromise it's standards and race to the bottom, and the worst offenders are the most highly rewarded. This should be an impetus for change.

Journalism has always been hated by those in power and by proxy their followers.

It's arguable thats a sign that they're doing a good job.

Few profession I have more respect for than journalists and police.

Most of them are trying to fight evil and make society better and are disliked for it.

They are a gritty grizzled bunch.

> Few profession I have more respect for than journalists and police.

I’m with you on journalists, but the police have so many bad apples that I think the profession itself attracts the wrong kind of people.