GamerTab That was an excellent one.

BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Maidexpl Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Uriah43 This movie begins with a happily married man named "Tom Redding" (Marc Singer) who works as a researcher studying sexual stimuli on the human body at a laboratory known as the Neurology Institute. One day he is called in to his supervisor's office and is handed a new project authored by a woman named "Dr. Claire Archer" (Lisa Pescia). Naturally, since the new project involves more revenue for the laboratory Tom is more than happy to lend whatever assistance he can. However, he soon learns that Dr. Archer has more on her mind than just research and the two of them soon begin to have a sexual relationship with one another. Although he initially believes that it is just a casual affair he soon realizes that it isn't as easy to break things off as he first thought. Likewise, he also doesn't quite fathom how emotionally unstable Dr. Archer can be when facing rejection. And that is when the trouble starts. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that I thought this was a rather interesting drama which benefited greatly from the performance of Lisa Pescia who managed to combine a certain amount of sexual tension with some dark and sinister overtones in the process. Admittedly, the subject matter isn't original but I believe it is definitely worth a watch for viewers who might be interested in a film of this type. Slightly above average.

guil fisher Unfortunately, I saw the second one first. But, then I gave Gregory Harrison a little bit of sympathy for getting stuck in that chestnut. There's no excuse for what Marc Singer does in this one. Jackson Barr, the screenwriter, once more writes such a crock that it is totally unbelievable. But Singer really believes what he's doing. I thought he had more sense than to do this sad piece of work. And once more, we have that bad actress playing the villain. Lisa Pescia is my least favorite actress. Why she continues to work is beyond me. Don't know whether I like her less or the role she plays. Boring. Predictable. Why these leading men can't see what a loser she is. This sick one is once again permitted to knock off her lovers and get away with it. So Barr is asking us to believe it's all right to tie men up, and they let her, and proceed to humiliate them as well, calling this hot sex! Wrong. She's not even attractive. Directed by Kristine Peterson, which may account why the women get away with it, it shows men off to be not only free loving, away from their wives, but stupid in their choices of seeing anything attractive in the other woman.Mary Crosby was the only one in this flick that made sense and this viewer applauded her out loud for dumping her loser of a husband. Marc Singer went through the entire film with a bug-eyed look. I have no intention of seeing BODY CHEMISTRY III or IV. Gonna spare myself the misery of sitting through them. Let us all hope that not only does Pescia get out of the business and off the screen, but that we no longer have to sit through this drivel. And Mr. Singer, get back to the animal adventure stuff you do so well.

12oclockhigh Thom Babbes performance as the lab assistant is simply over the top, far exceeding the performances of the more well known actors sending this little known flick over the top. You will have to watch this film to see what I'm referring to as I will not post a spoiler about the plot.

gridoon The first 20 minutes of this picture are pure exploitation: soft-core sex scenes, surrounded by unbelievably blah dialogue. , and it feels awfully derivative. However, I have to admit that it's rarely boring and that it ends in a somewhat unconventional way.