An elderly, crippled scientist offers funding to a struggling experimenter who is working on a new thought-transferral procedure. He tricks the younger guy by transferring his soul between their bodies. What complicates matters is that the soul of a dead serial killer gets mixed in creating dangerous impulses.This sci-fi thriller is one of an easily identifiable type of movie whose only real selling point is its nudity. I say easily identifiable because the cover imagery in these films always plays up the presence of the sexy girl who they have hired for the eye candy. In this instance it's the very beautiful Pamela Anderson who the film-makers had at their disposal. She is by a massive distance, the only thing of any merit in this film. Despite what most of us hope for, she isn't naked very often but when she is she is delectable. Actually, come to think of it, even when she is fully clothed she is pretty delectable here too. She may be eye candy but she is premier division eye candy. In this film she plays a performance artist who likes to pour paint onto the bodies of semi-naked girls. As good as this idea is it isn't unfortunately explored in quite enough detail for my liking!The problem with the movie, however, is that the plot-line kind of gets in the way a bit too much. It's not that a soft-core film can never successfully blend a narrative in with erotic moments – another Anderson vehicle Snapdragon does this fairly well. The main problem here is that despite being top-billed, this film mainly neglects her, choosing instead to focus on the two scientists in their none-too interesting experiments. And once the soul transferral experiment happens, the whole serial killer part of the story is very badly mishandled - it never plays up even remotely closely to its thrilling possibilities. Ultimately, this is a movie that sets up an interesting enough, if unoriginal set of ideas but doesn't deliver much on its early promise. It stars David Warner in the role as the elder scientist and Dean Stockwell in a blink-and-you'll-miss-him cameo. But at the end of the day, the only sane reason to watch this is to see the very lovely Ms Anderson.

The acting and plotting of this film is just plain boring and pretty terrible. If, however, you like to see Pamela Anderson's fantastic body (I do, but it doesn't make a film), then you'll get something out of this. The T&A is highly enjoyable, but ultimately this film feels pointless and uninteresting. 2/10.

Seeing the name Pamela Anderson (or Alyssa Milano) on the back of a video box invariably means b-grade trash. The question is is it GOOD b-grade trash or not? Hard to say with this one. If mad scientists, techno shamanism, a serial killer, thought transference and plenty of naked babes (including the delectable Justina Vail) sound like your scene, then check this one out and make up your own mind. I can't say it'll end up in my top ten, but I found it suprisingly watchable, and it costars DAVID WARNER. Nuff said. Just imagine how cheesy and fun this is going to look in twenty years time!

I used to refer to Pam as "Dead Parrot Anderson" (a comment on her acting abilities), until I realised that this was an insult to the parrot in the Monty Python sketch, which was a FAR better actor.I think Pam's breasts are displayed in the first 4 minutes of this film - if this film was meant to be "erotic" in some way, there could at least have been some buildup to the sex scenes.Some more characterisation so that we could have a little interest in the people (up & coming artist, with brilliant but pre-occupied scientist boyfriend, lecherous "friend" after the girl - surely the scriptwriter could have done a little more with this situation) before Pam reveals all would have gone a long way. I have no objection to such scenes if they are really part of the plot, but here they were quite irrelevant.