Subsequent Events	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2016
Subsequent Events [Abstract]
Subsequent Events	NOTE 18 – Subsequent Events Update to Stock-Based Compensation Mr. James Cotter, Jr. has asserted in past communications with the Company that options to acquire 50,000 shares of Class A Stock, issued to him in connection with his retention as the President of our Company, survived his termination as President. We have continued to show these options as outstanding, pending a determination of the issue by our Compensation and Stock Options Committee. On August 3, 2016, our Compensation and Stock Options Committee met, reviewed the issue and determined that such 50,000 options had in fact terminated with the termination of Mr. Cotter, Jr’s employment as President. Accordingly, these options are not, and have not been since the effective date of Mr. Cotter, Jr’s termination, outstanding and the aggregate currently outstanding options are 582,000. Updates to the Derivative Litigation On July 13, 2016, the stockholder plaintiffs in the consolidated derivative cases other than James J. Cotter, Jr. (the “Plaintiff Stockholders) announced the settlement of all of their alleged claims in their previously filed derivative lawsuit in the District Court of the State of Nevada for Clark County. Appropriate papers have now been filed by the parties to effectuate the settlement. However, the settlement of a derivative suit requires Court approval under Nevada Law. The Settlement Hearing will be held before The Honorable Elizabeth Gonzalez on October 6, 2016 at 8:30 a.m., in the Regional Justice Center, 200 Lewis Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89155. The settlement agreement negotiated by the parties (the “Settlement Agreement”) provides, among other things, for mutual releases and that the parties will be responsible for their own attorney’s fees and costs. A copy of the Settlement Agreement has been posted on our website at www.ReadingRDI.com. In the joint press release issued by the Company and the Plaintiff Stockholders, representatives of the Plaintiff Stockholders stated as follows: "We are pleased with the conclusions reached by our investigations as Plaintiff Stockholders and now firmly believe that the Reading Board of Directors has and will continue to protect stockholder interests and will continue to work to maximize shareholder value over the long term. We appreciate the Company's willingness to engage in open dialogue and are excited about the Company's prospects. Our questions about the termination of James Cotter, Jr., and various transactions between Reading and members of the Cotter family-or entities they control-have been definitively addressed and put to rest. We are impressed by measures the Reading Board has made over the past year to further strengthen corporate governance. We fully support the Reading Board and management team and their strategy to create stockholder value.” Subsequently, on August 3, 2016 James J. Cotter Jr., filed a motion with the Court seeking permission to file a “Second Amended Verified Complaint” (the “SAP”). Court approval is required for any such amendment. The Company and each of the Defendant Directors intend to oppose Mr. Cotter, Jr’s motion to amend. The SAP adds as defendants Directors Judy Codding and Michael Wrotniak It adds additional purported claims including purported claims relating to the selection of Ellen Cotter to serve as our Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, the retention of Margaret Cotter to serve as our Executive Vice President responsible for our live theater operations, the ability of Ellen Cotter and Margaret Cotter to vote 100,000 share of our Class B stock, issued upon the exercise of certain stock options held of record by the Estate of James J. Cotter, Sr., and the management and development of our New York properties and the handling by our Board of Directors of an indication of interest received at the end of May relating to the purchase of all of the stock of our Company, Our press release dated July 18, 2016 described this indication of interest and the Board’s determinations with respect thereto as follows: “Reading International, Inc. (NASDAQ: RDI) (“Reading” or the “Company”) confirmed today that in June 2016, it rejected an unsolicited, non-binding indication of interest from a third party to acquire all of Reading’s outstanding stock at $17 per share. The non-binding indication of interest, and its rejection, were disclosed last week by Board member James J. Cotter, Jr., in a public filing he made in the derivative litigation in the District Court for Clark County, Nevada. To clarify the record, our Board of Directors, after receiving input from management and its outside advisors, carefully evaluated the indication of interest. Following this review, the Board of Directors determined that our stockholders would be better served by pursuing our independent, stand-alone strategic business plan and communicated this to the third party. Reading’s Board strongly believed that the proposed transaction was not in the best interest of our Company or our stockholders. The statements made by Mr. Cotter, Jr. in his litigation filing were not authorized by the Company, do not constitute Company communications, and the Company takes no responsibility for their accuracy. Typically, it is not our practice to disclose unsolicited expressions of interest and Reading undertakes no obligation to further update this disclosure.”

NOTE 18 – Subsequent Events

Update to Stock-Based Compensation

Mr. James Cotter, Jr. has asserted in past communications with the Company that options to acquire 50,000 shares of Class A Stock, issued to him in connection with his retention as the President of our Company, survived his termination as President. We have continued to show these options as outstanding, pending a determination of the issue by our Compensation and Stock Options Committee. On August 3, 2016, our Compensation and Stock Options Committee met, reviewed the issue and determined that such 50,000 options had in fact terminated with the termination of Mr. Cotter, Jr’s employment as President. Accordingly, these options are not, and have not been since the effective date of Mr. Cotter, Jr’s termination, outstanding and the aggregate currently outstanding options are 582,000.

Updates to the Derivative Litigation

On July 13, 2016, the stockholder plaintiffs in the consolidated derivative cases other than James J. Cotter, Jr. (the “Plaintiff Stockholders) announced the settlement of all of their alleged claims in their previously filed derivative lawsuit in the District Court of the State of Nevada for Clark County. Appropriate papers have now been filed by the parties to effectuate the settlement. However, the settlement of a derivative suit requires Court approval under Nevada Law. The Settlement Hearing will be held before The Honorable Elizabeth Gonzalez on October 6, 2016 at 8:30 a.m., in the Regional Justice Center, 200 Lewis Avenue, Las Vegas, NV 89155. The settlement agreement negotiated by the parties (the “Settlement Agreement”) provides, among other things, for mutual releases and that the parties will be responsible for their own attorney’s fees and costs. A copy of the Settlement Agreement has been posted on our website at www.ReadingRDI.com. In the joint press release issued by the Company and the Plaintiff Stockholders, representatives of the Plaintiff Stockholders stated as follows: "We are pleased with the conclusions reached by our investigations as Plaintiff Stockholders and now firmly believe that the Reading Board of Directors has and will continue to protect stockholder interests and will continue to work to maximize shareholder value over the long term. We appreciate the Company's willingness to engage in open dialogue and are excited about the Company's prospects. Our questions about the termination of James Cotter, Jr., and various transactions between Reading and members of the Cotter family-or entities they control-have been definitively addressed and put to rest. We are impressed by measures the Reading Board has made over the past year to further strengthen corporate governance. We fully support the Reading Board and management team and their strategy to create stockholder value.”

Subsequently, on August 3, 2016 James J. Cotter Jr., filed a motion with the Court seeking permission to file a “Second Amended Verified Complaint” (the “SAP”). Court approval is required for any such amendment. The Company and each of the Defendant Directors intend to oppose Mr. Cotter, Jr’s motion to amend.

The SAP adds as defendants Directors Judy Codding and Michael Wrotniak It adds additional purported claims including purported claims relating to the selection of Ellen Cotter to serve as our Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, the retention of Margaret Cotter to serve as our Executive Vice President responsible for our live theater operations, the ability of Ellen Cotter and Margaret Cotter to vote 100,000 share of our Class B stock, issued upon the exercise of certain stock options held of record by the Estate of James J. Cotter, Sr., and the management and development of our New York properties and the handling by our Board of Directors of an indication of interest received at the end of May relating to the purchase of all of the stock of our Company,

Our press release dated July 18, 2016 described this indication of interest and the Board’s determinations with respect thereto as follows:

“Reading International, Inc. (NASDAQ: RDI) (“Reading” or the “Company”) confirmed today that in June 2016, it rejected an unsolicited, non-binding indication of interest from a third party to acquire all of Reading’s outstanding stock at $17 per share. The non-binding indication of interest, and its rejection, were disclosed last week by Board member James J. Cotter, Jr., in a public filing he made in the derivative litigation in the District Court for Clark County, Nevada.

To clarify the record, our Board of Directors, after receiving input from management and its outside advisors, carefully evaluated the indication of interest. Following this review, the Board of Directors determined that our stockholders would be better served by pursuing our independent, stand-alone strategic business plan and communicated this to the third party. Reading’s Board strongly believed that the proposed transaction was not in the best interest of our Company or our stockholders.

The statements made by Mr. Cotter, Jr. in his litigation filing were not authorized by the Company, do not constitute Company communications, and the Company takes no responsibility for their accuracy. Typically, it is not our practice to disclose unsolicited expressions of interest and Reading undertakes no obligation to further update this disclosure.”