IMDb RATING
3.3/10
1.9K
YOUR RATING
An artist tries to rescue her scientist boyfriend, who has switched bodies with an evil, elderly genius.An artist tries to rescue her scientist boyfriend, who has switched bodies with an evil, elderly genius.An artist tries to rescue her scientist boyfriend, who has switched bodies with an evil, elderly genius.
Pat Millicano
- 1st Paramedic
- (as Pat Malicano)
Chantel Rae
- Woman in bath
- (as Chantel King)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
2ozq
This littler sucker came on late night TV and I ended up watching, almost like a train wreck. You keep watching, totally amazed these good actors (Dean Stockwell, David Warner & the cute Brian Krause) are stuck in this badly concepted movie. The script sucks, and Pamela Anderson is there purely for sex - both with Krause (one rather vivid scene in particular - not necessary to plot) and fondling other women in the name of fine art.
Don't trust the physics - very shaky and zero credibility. There's little the actors or director could do with such a sucky script. Add a few bad actors in with a few decent ones - and you can really tell the difference. The best scene in my opinion is between Krause and Stockwell as Krause is leaving the university, but the rest is really struggling. While maybe not Z-grade, it's awfully close. Might be so bad its funny for some.
For very late night TV it's perfect. To buy or rent, don't waste your money unless you're a fan of any of the actors mentioned above.
Don't trust the physics - very shaky and zero credibility. There's little the actors or director could do with such a sucky script. Add a few bad actors in with a few decent ones - and you can really tell the difference. The best scene in my opinion is between Krause and Stockwell as Krause is leaving the university, but the rest is really struggling. While maybe not Z-grade, it's awfully close. Might be so bad its funny for some.
For very late night TV it's perfect. To buy or rent, don't waste your money unless you're a fan of any of the actors mentioned above.
I'm willing to bet hard money you picked this up for the same reason I did. 'Naked Souls' isn't subtle about why we should give it a go. Check out that box cover. So sit back and watch a b-movie plot about mind transfer and wait in anticipation for Pam to show up and get naked.
There's no denying she looked great sans clothes back in 1996 and ultimately that's what its all about here. Brian Krause plays the young scientist who comes up with this tech. Pam his girlfriend. While David Warner plays the rich old benefactor who supplies him with cash and has an ulterior motive to get closer to his work. Dean Stockwell puts in a quick paycheck role.
There's a half-baked serial killer angle attached which allows for the sight of more female nudity, but it never goes anywhere being barely built up. 'Naked Souls' doesn't have a story or characters worth talking about at length. It does however supply what you came for in the end allowing Pam to go topless and get felt up twice looking great.
There's no denying she looked great sans clothes back in 1996 and ultimately that's what its all about here. Brian Krause plays the young scientist who comes up with this tech. Pam his girlfriend. While David Warner plays the rich old benefactor who supplies him with cash and has an ulterior motive to get closer to his work. Dean Stockwell puts in a quick paycheck role.
There's a half-baked serial killer angle attached which allows for the sight of more female nudity, but it never goes anywhere being barely built up. 'Naked Souls' doesn't have a story or characters worth talking about at length. It does however supply what you came for in the end allowing Pam to go topless and get felt up twice looking great.
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.
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.
STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All Costs ................Think how many reviews this film has received complaining about the bad acting and awful story.Well,I'd actually rented it expecting,and,dare I say it,actually vaguely hoping for these things.I just wanted to be titillated by the gorgeous Pamela Anderson Lee engaging in frequent sexual encounters.After all,the back sleeve did promise SEX/NUDITY to be frequent and strong.It was this or face the shame of renting a porno video.So I wanted to see Pamela basically screwing anything that moves.WHAT?This sucked.There were about two sexually explicit scenes in the whole film.And they weren't even kinky and naughty like I hoped ,they were more sensuous and intimate.Needless to say,the two things mentioned above were as bad as expected.So instead of someone knocking her door to be greeted with a forward yank and ''come here big boy'',you get some heavily pretentious ''acting'' from Pammy.Even Barb Wire was a better porno video than this.One to completely avoid,and not risk losing your credit over.*
...is the best part of a movie is truly scary, but there it is. She and Brian Krause roll around naked, while David Warner and Dean Stockwell do the best they can to save this turkey. However, the basic plot is mediocre at best: even a better actress (meaning...well just about anyone, except maybe Anna Nicole Smith) and Sir John Gielgud would have had their work cut out for them making anything out of this plot.
Did you know
- TriviaPamela Anderson justified her participation in the movie's sex scenes by claiming that they were important to the story and saying that she trusted the filmmakers. Lyndon Chubbuck had previously directed her in three episodes of Alerte à Malibu (1989).
- ConnectionsReferenced in The Angry Video Game Nerd: V.I.P. With Pamela Anderson (2014)
- How long is Naked Souls?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $500,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 25 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content