Redskinluver:
I am no film critic, but as far as her talent goes, I would have to say it was certainly okay for the type of work she did, certainly Baywatch. After all, that show lasted 11 seasons and was said to be the most popular TV show ever.
It really comes down to personal likes. For instance I love the old Tarzan movies with Johnny Weissmuller, doesn't matter if he was a not a superb actor.
<snip>
You will like this CK, there was a Baywatch episode where CJ, Pam's character delivered a hard smack to the seat of a male lifeguard's trunks.
The guys were talking about some county regulation banning G- string swimsuits( that sounds bizarre considering the many bare cheeks seen on the show.) Someone asked how do you tell what is an illegal suit, and someone replied it had to do with what the nates showed. Guard "Newmie" asked, "What are nates?" CJ smacked his butt, saying, "Those are nates!"
Well, I may have watched a couple episodes of "Baywatch," but I obviously wasn't a fan in spite its focus on pretty, well-endowed young women in brief bathing suits--it seemed to me that the physical appeal of youthful, attractive, scantily-attired characters was mainly what the program was based upon. For that type of a television show, I'll admit that Pamela Anderson was pretty much ideal to portray a lead character, which was my point all along, i.e. that her career as an actress was based primarily on her sex appeal.
I'm hardly envisioning her ever having been able to star in "Hill Street Blues" or "thirtysomething," however; just because a program like "Baywatch" was popular doesn't mean that it was a high-quality production requiring superior acting ability.
However, I'll admit that I'd happily watch the "Baywatch" episode you described, just to watch voluptuous Pamela give that young man a solid swat on his behind with her smacking palm...

--C.K.