I hate to burst your bubble
CTRFLD_Admirer, but this "Lynda Carter nude" is a well-known
fake that has been around for years and has been debunked by several sources including
The Fake Detective...
Check out TFD's website and see for yourself. It's Case #200 on this page...
http://www.fake-detective.com/book-2/casefl-2.html
As far as the Pl@boy article goes (10/79; pages 114-121, 195): the only mention of "Linda Carter" is in a quote from Colleen Camp when she says:
"Pl@boy did a centerfold shot with her, the whole bit. But seven months later a typhoon had destroyed all the sets and Linda couldn't continue because of Wonder Woman, I guess, and I was in the film after all."
First off, this info is coming from Colleen not from Pl@boy, Francis Coppola, or Lynda Carter so it's really just heresay information and doesn't provide a clear explanation of what really happened with that situation. That Colleen says they "did a centerfold shot, the whole bit" with Lynda doesn't necessarily mean it was a nude centerfold; it may have been an almost-nude "cover-up the tits 'n' bush" centerfold shot like the kind that were still being done at the time the movie was taking place (not when it was shot).
Second, if they had in fact done "the whole [centerfold shot] bit" with Lynda those pix would have come out Loooooooong ago. Pl@boy rarely, if ever, does a photo-shoot without retaining the publishing rights in full. They had no qualms about publishing the Suzanne Somers nude pix after she became famous on Three's Company, and everyone knows about the Vanessa Williams thing with Pen#h*use. Stills of Lynda nude from
Bobbie Jo And The Outlaw have circulated for years in print and online and It doesn't take a lot of industry knowledge to figure out that if there were any posed nude photos of Lynda (regardless of how much skin is actually shown), they would have seen the light of day many moons ago. There's just too much money to be had to keep something like that locked up for 30 years.
Third, from what I've read,
Bobbie Jo... was kind of a one-off for Lynda as far as nudity goes. Lots of actresses were doing nudity in the 1970s, a decade in which nudity and sexuality were being released from the bondage of 1950s prudism and moral stigma. In other words, a lot of people--people that wouldn't necessarily do it commonly, or even again at all--were taking their clothes off at nudist colonies, nude beaches, in their backyards, in the movies, in magazines, etc. It was liberating, or at least considered liberating at the time, especially for women. But I've read numerous interviews with Lynda where she says that if she had to do it all over again she wouldn't have done the nudes scenes in
BJ&TO, and the impression I've always gotten from her is that nude modeling was not something she wanted to do, even back in the 1970s. Lynda was a top-shelf beauty pageanter and didn't really need the exposure of nude modeling to help her career I think.
Articles like this often gloss over the details of such situations anyway; it may have been that Lynda actually turned down the role because of the nudity, or that any such photos were destroyed or never printed because of the casting change. But changes like this usually aren't as simple as these types of promotional articles make them sound. Lynda probably bowed out when Wonder Woman came along, which was in 1976, not long after production began on Apocalypse Now but at least a year or more before the Bunny show scene was shot. Shooting on Apocalypse Now was delayed for long periods of time and any actress offered the starring role in her own TV series would easily take that over a relatively small part in a troubled feature film production. It may have been that Pl@boy had planned to do a shoot with Lynda for the movie but never had the chance because she began Wonder Woman before they could do it. Colleen Camp might have just gotten here facts mixed up a bit.
So once again, I'm sorry to burst your bubble (and everyone else's). We all wish that photo was real, but it ain't. And beware--I've seen E-Bay dealers trying to pass it off as genuine (and autographed no less!) charging $50 or more for it online. It's just a fantasy I'm afraid. A good one, but a fantasy just the same.