This could be the right movie for the right people at the right time but I have a big big problem with the title. "Beautiful Joe" is a famous child's story about a dog and to use that for the title of this movie epitomizes the worst of present day Hollywood which is that they have no respect for the audience. The lead role could have been a Jerry or a Walt or anybody else and the title would have worked even better for this movie. But since we know the two groups of people in this country most cut off from reality are always those in Washington and those in Hollywood, we get "Beautiful Joe".This movie would be just the thing for a middle aged or older couple on a date or romantic evening at home. I bought the VHS tape at a yardsale for a quarter; it is represented as a dark comedy perhaps similar to Get Shorty or A Fish Called Wanda. That is only in their dreams as it really is not funny beyond the most basic of stock gags. In fact from what I watched, about a third of the entire movie, it is really nothing but tired stock bits strung together. E.g. mugger attacks couple but woman kicks his butt, man goes home with sexy woman but ends up buying food for kids instead. Safe proved techniques, all very boring to me.Sharon Stone's character is your slightly aging, could stand to lose just a few pounds but still hot Miami or Catskills resort gold-digger type. She doesn't do badly but she doesn't do enough. If this is to be a sexy funny movie, she could have been a bit sexier and a bit funnier. In general the film works harder not to be sexy, than to be sexy; and not to be funny, than to be funny. As a date movie or a chick flick for the right people, this movie could do just fine. I don't expect that single men or any younger viewers would find much in it.

SPOILERS THROUGH:I did not think this was a bad movie but neither did I think it was great. There were a few things I didn't like, one being the amount of plot contrivances. A lot of movies have that aspect but sometimes there's other things that are so well done it kinds of takes the focus off that aspect. Not here. There's a lot that just seems(for lack of a better term: "put on".) And the amount of bad things that keep Cropping up and happening just when one is over with almost makes that the focus of the movie.Then there's the amount of screeching and melodrama. And when Hush and Joe were fighting in the casino how come nobody even batted an eye except the kids? Wouldn't SOMEBODY have told them to be quiet? It's things like that which took away from my enjoyment of this movie. Then toward the end it got really tough. I mean every five minutes something would come up to make it seem like Joe and Hush were finished. After awhile it's tough not to think "Just get together already".The movie is not at all unwatchable. It's not what I'd call bad. But I'd only Give it a 5 or 6 or so for the reasons mentioned above. In terms of positives there were a couple of things that really stuck out. One was Sharon Stone in this role. When she lessened up on the screeching she was excellent and I wish her character had been a little-well-CALMER-because Stone is a really good actress when she's playing quality Roles and I think, though she brought some nice aspects to the role of Hush, she could have brought even more if the role had been toned down a bit.Now the SECOND and most important thing I liked was Billy Connolly as Joe. He created a lovely character and even though I didn't love the movie I did think he did a 10 of 10 in his portrayal of Joe. That was without a doubt the highlight of the movie.I kind of wish this movie had been either a straight out noir with quieter characters, more mystery, and less screaming or a sweet family drama. There seems to have been a lot of potential here because the storyline in general sounds somewhat intriguing. But there was a lot that seemed forced. The movie is not bad but was not great however the character of Joe is one that I'll remember and if one is going to see this movie they should see it for that reason. My vote for the movie overall is about average.

Not a great film, but not bad either. Cast are excellent and it's fun. Plus, except for a few swear words, you could watch it with adults. Billy Connolly is always entertaining. Imagine how great he'd be if he ever changed his hair do. Sharon Stone plays an over-the-top floozy (or is it floozie?) with too much makeup and too little clothing. No nudity, though. And if she seems different, Gil Bellows is a far cry from the Allie McBeal attorney. I recognised Ian Holm, but I couldn't recall from where. The British actor gives an incredible performance as a tough mobster who may have just met his match. Or not. And Jurnee Smollett is delightful as the daughter, who is a far better judge of men than her mom. Written and directed by Stephen Metcalfe, who manages to avoid annoying clichés until the very end. Then again, at least it has an ending.

Sharon Stone stars as Hush, a sleazy and irresponsible woman who has two children and lives in a small apartment. She is also in debt with a low-rate loan shark and, as a result, she is constantly being threatened by them. However, she eventually meets Joe (Billy Connolly), a man whose wife has just left him and also has found out that he has a brain tumor. They both fall in love while he helps her deal with her problems.With such a story, one would think that this movie would add up to something good. However, the reality is that 'Beautiful Joe' is a film that does not work on any level. It starts out as a drama that puts an emphasis on a rather unconvincing love story between Joe and Hush. It then shifts to comedy (rather lame comedy that is) during the middle of the film. By the end, the film once again shifts back to drama. With such a lack of direction in a poor script and terrible acting (especially from Stone, whose career is definitely in freefall), 'Beautiful Joe' is anything but beautiful. (1/10)