Vintage Erotica Forums - View Single Post - Lynda Carter ~ Colleen Camp Picture Debate

**tertium** · August 5th, 2008, 02:02 AM

Well, here is my original post concerning the Colleen Camp/Lynda Carter photos. I did do quite a bit of work and I'd hate to think it was lost:

I have read and re-read the ongoing debate over the authenticity of the Lynda Carter/Colleen camp photograph. I would like to thank Gregj1967 and CTRFLD admirer for bringing many facts, opinions, and insights into this subject. However, instead of trying to engage each of their points, I tried to gather as much information about the topic as possible and then draw my own conclusion based on what was most probable. As both parties would probably agree, there is no way to ever completely know for sure. However, I do believe it is possible to draw a reasonable conclusion, based on what we already know.

Here is the photo in question as submitted by The Fake Detective and by CTRFLD admirer:

Swamp Rat from another forum provided me the full The Playboy article from October 1979.

Here is the relevant text to our discussion:

Though the transcript of Colleen’s interview reads “Linda Carter” it is obvious that she is talking about “Lynda Carter” and that the transcriber simply made a typo.

The second confirmation that Lynda Carter was attached to Apocalypse Now cast as a Playboy Bunny comes from the wonderland site dedicated to Lynda.

From an article in “Fanfare” Issue 1, Spring 1977:
“Her second film is not yet release: Francis Ford Coppola's Vietnam war epic Apocalypse Now, filmed partly on location in the Philippines in the midst of nearly impossible weather conditions when typhoon Olga hit the island of Luzon...One group of actors and technicians were sequestered across the river, while Coppola and additional cast members, including Lynda, were with another group at Olongapo. For three days each gathering was totally isolated from the others ten miles away, not knowing if their colleagues were alive. Fortunately there were no casualties. During her two and a half weeks in the Philippines, Lynda spent most of the time slogging about in the mud clad in Army fatigues and combat boots, hoping with everyone else to get production underway again. Eventually Apocalypse Now resumed filming and she was able to complete her scenes, after which she returned stateside to start work on the first of eleven 60-minute Wonder Woman specials.”

Francis Ford Coppola eventually decided to scrap what he had filmed during this time period and reshoot. By that time Lynda was already doing Wonder Woman and unavailable. That is when Colleen Camp gets the nod as Miss May. Unless Coppola decided to do a major rewrite just for the casting of this one small role, we have to assume that Lynda’s filmed scenes were pretty close to what transpires to Colleen in the added scenes in Redux.

If Lynda were cast as the Playmate, and if shooting was far enough along that she was actually over in the Philippines filming her scenes, then a Playboy centerfold “prop” would have had to have been produced as part of pre-production of the film. This “prop” played an important part in the set up of one of the cut scenes in the original Apocalypse Now but which was added in Apocalypse Now Redux. Here’s where Colleen’s “prop” appears:

Later the soldier in love with the image of the centerfold has a chance to have sex with her. But he first recreates the pose she had in the centerfold:

If Lynda was originally cast as the Playmate later portrayed by Colleen Camp, Zoetrope Productions would have needed the centerfold prop of Lynda to use before she left for the Philippines.

The only piece of information that I’m missing is the entire “Expose!” article in which the photo is claimed to be a painting. If anyone could provide that, please post it in its entirety here so everyone can have a chance to judge its merits w/o any conjecture or hearsay. However, even without that article I asked myself what made more sense.
1) A fly by night magazine gets a hold of a museum quality photo realistic topless painting of Lynda Carter in a similar but not exact pose as Colleen Camp in Apocalypse Now and the Playboy magazine. Then they publish the “painting” saying tisk, tisk to the perpetrator of the hoax.

Or
2) A fly by night magazine gets a hold of a “lost” prop from Apocalypse Now, several of which would have had to have been made and any of which could have been stolen during the chaos of the typhoon. Then they decide to publish the photo as a fake, but of course with the ol’ Fox News trick of using the “?” on the cover. As in, “Lynda Carter Topless Photo?” buy this magazine and see for yourself. By claiming it is a fake they can claim innocence in any lawsuit brought by Lynda or Zoetrope. They were only exposing the fake, not trying to profit off the illegally obtained photo. If Zoetrope or Lynda does file a lawsuit, a seemingly fake topless photograph of American’s sweetheart, Wonder Woman, now appears to be real. This creates huge publicity and the photo would obviously have been distributed much more widely.

By claiming it was a fake in the first place, “Expose!” magazine can sell the image while pretty much assuring them that they won’t be sued.

In conclusion CTRFLD admirer would you be so kind as to scan in this remarkable photo once more but at the highest resolution your scanner can muster. Because as of this moment, I do believe it is the best example of the only known real topless photo of the most beautiful woman who has ever lived. (Except for my wife of course.)

To gregj1967 I would like to express my gratitude for keeping this thread going for such a long time. Without you, this information would never have been brought to me and I would never have given that photograph a second thought. I don’t believe the issue of the authenticity of the photograph should be a win/lose situation. As I mentioned at the beginning of my post, there is no way to know with absolute certainty that the photo is real, only what is most probable. And the worst thing that can happen is that if you are wrong about the photo being a fake then we as a community now have a genuine fully topless photo of a goddess.

CTRFLD admirer I can’t thank you enough for bringing this to my attention. I have believed for the past 10 years that that photo was a fake, but I am now convinced that it was a brilliant example of hiding something extremely valuable right in plain site. Thank you very, very much.

August 5th, 2008, 02:02 AM	#17
tertium Vintage Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 355 Thanks: 1,430 Thanked 11,854 Times in 354 Posts	Well, here is my original post concerning the Colleen Camp/Lynda Carter photos. I did do quite a bit of work and I'd hate to think it was lost: I have read and re-read the ongoing debate over the authenticity of the Lynda Carter/Colleen camp photograph. I would like to thank Gregj1967 and CTRFLD admirer for bringing many facts, opinions, and insights into this subject. However, instead of trying to engage each of their points, I tried to gather as much information about the topic as possible and then draw my own conclusion based on what was most probable. As both parties would probably agree, there is no way to ever completely know for sure. However, I do believe it is possible to draw a reasonable conclusion, based on what we already know. Here is the photo in question as submitted by The Fake Detective and by CTRFLD admirer: Swamp Rat from another forum provided me the full The Playboy article from October 1979. Here is the relevant text to our discussion: Though the transcript of Colleen’s interview reads “Linda Carter” it is obvious that she is talking about “Lynda Carter” and that the transcriber simply made a typo. The second confirmation that Lynda Carter was attached to Apocalypse Now cast as a Playboy Bunny comes from the wonderland site dedicated to Lynda. From an article in “Fanfare” Issue 1, Spring 1977: “Her second film is not yet release: Francis Ford Coppola's Vietnam war epic Apocalypse Now, filmed partly on location in the Philippines in the midst of nearly impossible weather conditions when typhoon Olga hit the island of Luzon...One group of actors and technicians were sequestered across the river, while Coppola and additional cast members, including Lynda, were with another group at Olongapo. For three days each gathering was totally isolated from the others ten miles away, not knowing if their colleagues were alive. Fortunately there were no casualties. During her two and a half weeks in the Philippines, Lynda spent most of the time slogging about in the mud clad in Army fatigues and combat boots, hoping with everyone else to get production underway again. Eventually Apocalypse Now resumed filming and she was able to complete her scenes, after which she returned stateside to start work on the first of eleven 60-minute Wonder Woman specials.” Francis Ford Coppola eventually decided to scrap what he had filmed during this time period and reshoot. By that time Lynda was already doing Wonder Woman and unavailable. That is when Colleen Camp gets the nod as Miss May. Unless Coppola decided to do a major rewrite just for the casting of this one small role, we have to assume that Lynda’s filmed scenes were pretty close to what transpires to Colleen in the added scenes in Redux. If Lynda were cast as the Playmate, and if shooting was far enough along that she was actually over in the Philippines filming her scenes, then a Playboy centerfold “prop” would have had to have been produced as part of pre-production of the film. This “prop” played an important part in the set up of one of the cut scenes in the original Apocalypse Now but which was added in Apocalypse Now Redux. Here’s where Colleen’s “prop” appears: Later the soldier in love with the image of the centerfold has a chance to have sex with her. But he first recreates the pose she had in the centerfold: If Lynda was originally cast as the Playmate later portrayed by Colleen Camp, Zoetrope Productions would have needed the centerfold prop of Lynda to use before she left for the Philippines. The only piece of information that I’m missing is the entire “Expose!” article in which the photo is claimed to be a painting. If anyone could provide that, please post it in its entirety here so everyone can have a chance to judge its merits w/o any conjecture or hearsay. However, even without that article I asked myself what made more sense. 1) A fly by night magazine gets a hold of a museum quality photo realistic topless painting of Lynda Carter in a similar but not exact pose as Colleen Camp in Apocalypse Now and the Playboy magazine. Then they publish the “painting” saying tisk, tisk to the perpetrator of the hoax. Or 2) A fly by night magazine gets a hold of a “lost” prop from Apocalypse Now, several of which would have had to have been made and any of which could have been stolen during the chaos of the typhoon. Then they decide to publish the photo as a fake, but of course with the ol’ Fox News trick of using the “?” on the cover. As in, “Lynda Carter Topless Photo?” buy this magazine and see for yourself. By claiming it is a fake they can claim innocence in any lawsuit brought by Lynda or Zoetrope. They were only exposing the fake, not trying to profit off the illegally obtained photo. If Zoetrope or Lynda does file a lawsuit, a seemingly fake topless photograph of American’s sweetheart, Wonder Woman, now appears to be real. This creates huge publicity and the photo would obviously have been distributed much more widely. By claiming it was a fake in the first place, “Expose!” magazine can sell the image while pretty much assuring them that they won’t be sued. In conclusion CTRFLD admirer would you be so kind as to scan in this remarkable photo once more but at the highest resolution your scanner can muster. Because as of this moment, I do believe it is the best example of the only known real topless photo of the most beautiful woman who has ever lived. (Except for my wife of course.) To gregj1967 I would like to express my gratitude for keeping this thread going for such a long time. Without you, this information would never have been brought to me and I would never have given that photograph a second thought. I don’t believe the issue of the authenticity of the photograph should be a win/lose situation. As I mentioned at the beginning of my post, there is no way to know with absolute certainty that the photo is real, only what is most probable. And the worst thing that can happen is that if you are wrong about the photo being a fake then we as a community now have a genuine fully topless photo of a goddess. CTRFLD admirer I can’t thank you enough for bringing this to my attention. I have believed for the past 10 years that that photo was a fake, but I am now convinced that it was a brilliant example of hiding something extremely valuable right in plain site. Thank you very, very much. Last edited by Sam Spade; February 9th, 2009 at 06:34 PM..