The slow story is about the owner of a strip club who ends up losing a fortune gambling...and you know that the mobsters behind the game won't be pleased if he cannot pay his debt. So, the mob comes up with a solution....if the guyy cannot pay, he can do a job for them to pay if off...kill a Chinese bookie. Despite the simple plot (which is pretty much the title of the film),the story takes a very long time to unfold.

I have never understood the appeal of the films directed by John Cassavetes. Critics love them and the fancy schmancy Criterion Collection has released his films...but I find them dull, in need of editing and amateurish. The latest Cassavetes film I saw, "The Killing of a Chinese Bookie", was even listed in the book "1001 Movies You Need to See Before You Die". Is there something I am missing with this and the other Cassavetes films??

Let me explain...especially in regard to "The Killing of a Chinese Bookie". The camerawork is often strange....oddly framed and looking like an amateur film. There are also many scenes which seem long or unnecessary...as if an editing was strongly needed. The leading man, Ben Gazzara, actually objected to this and felt the 135 minute original version (the one I saw) was a mess because of the poor editing....and eventually a short 108 minute version was released. I haven't seen this shorter one...but I can see what Gazzara meant about the original.

About the only thing I really liked in the movie was the cast....the baddies were played by some of the better character actors of the time, such as Morgan Woodward, Timothy Carey and Seymour Cassel. Plus, Gazzara was always a terrific actor. But the glacial pacing and poor camerawork really detract from the movie and even these folks can't help elevate the movie to the watchable level.

Cosmo Vitelli (Ben Gazzara) owns the burlesque club Crazy Horse West in California. Business is a little slow. After paying off his gambling debt, he promptly loses $23k more at a private casino. The boss calls in the debt and forces him to kill a minor Chinese bookie to clean the slate. Only the minor figure turns out to be a major gang leader.

There is something hypnotic about John Cassavetes' directing style. Ben Gazzara is charismatic. I watched the 135-minute version. Even the long rambling burlesque shows are fascinating. It's supported by a gangster story that provides the movie with its drive. I do wish that Cassavetes would film the action with more intensity. His style doesn't work as well with the action scenes. Also after the final shootout, I rather have the movie end quicker.

A proud strip club owner (Ben Gazzara) is forced to come to terms with himself as a man, when his gambling addiction gets him in hot water with the mob, who offer him only one alternative.

Gazzara has made a career of playing seedy characters. Although he regularly worked with Cassavetes, younger audiences might know him best from "Roadhouse" or "The Big Lebowski". They would not be disappointed by his portrayal here. Cassavetes regulars Al Ruban and Seymour Cassel also appear, though Gena Rowlands is noticeably absent.

Cassavetes' best work is widely regarded to be either "Faces" or "A Woman Under the Influence", but a case could be made for this one, as well. His earlier work relied heavily on improvisation, and some might argue they suffered from too much "small talk" adding minutes to the running time. Here the plot is much more linear, much tighter to a script. As Larry Karaszewski has noted, it is much more "high concept" than his earlier work.

Phillip Lopate wrote, "The plot's biggest gamble is to make Cosmo, this likable if screwed-up schnook, actually go through with the killing. Is it plausible that someone so seemingly decent would do such a thing?" But, of course, this is the whole point... when you must choose between killing for the mob or being killed by the mob, your actions may no longer be decided by whether you are a "decent" person.

The 1978 re-cut of the film is even tighter, removing much of the unnecessary night club footage, which is unusual (considering most director's cuts are longer than the theatrical releases). In some ways, it is a different film, and making comparisons between the two is a review in itself.