A look inside Hollywood and the movies : ENDANGERED SPECIES : 1992’s Best Actress? Think Real Hard . . .

In March, even while the best actress Oscar race of ’91 was being determined, the battle for the ’92 statue had pretty much been called.

Two-time nominee Michelle Pfeiffer, according to industry sources and Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences insiders, was considered a shoo-in. At that point, the actress had three films scheduled for release this year: “Batman Returns,” the intimate period piece “Love Field” and the Martin Scorsese drama “The Age of Innocence.” How could she lose?

But a funny thing happened on the way to the podium. “Love Field” and “The Age of Innocence” were rescheduled for ’93. (“Age of Innocence” will be released next fall, and “Love Field,” one of the ill-fated Orion’s movie, is tentatively being discussed as an April release.)

In a different year, it is doubtful that Pfeiffer’s campy turn as the sultry Catwoman would have assured her a nomination. Academy voters usually vote for hand-wringing, Angst -ridden performances, not ones in which an actor is brought back to life by kind kittens after a terrible fall.

But in ‘92--when the number of lead actress performances is so slim that Whoopi Goldberg is being talked about as a potential nominee for “Sister Act”--anything is possible.

“This is the worst year for female lead performances since 1975,” proclaims academy expert Mason Wiley, co-author with Damien Bona of the best-selling “Inside Oscar.” (Louise Fletcher won that year for “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” for what was widely considered to be a supporting role.) “In today’s Hollywood, where everything is about selling tickets, it’s just very clear that studios would rather spend money on something for Steven Seagal instead of Jessica Lange.”

In Hollywood in 1992, it was definitely the year of the male. Industry sources say that around 30 actors will be duking it out for a best actor nomination. Comparatively, only 10 actresses are believed to be serious contenders for the five best actress nomination slots.

According to the buzz, they are, in no particular order: Pfeiffer (“Batman Returns”); Emma Thompson (“Howards End”); Geena Davis (“A League of Their Own”); Goldberg (“Sister Act”); Madeleine Stowe (“The Last of the Mohicans”); Meryl Streep (“Death Becomes Her”) and, from upcoming films, Susan Sarandon (“Lorenzo’s Oil”) and Shirley MacLaine (“Used People”).

Demi Moore, who has above-title billing with her “A Few Good Men” mates Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson, has what is widely considered to be a supporting role in the film. But because of the dearth of best actress competitors this year, one source close to the film say it is feasible she might be upgraded to that category.

“Some of these women in the commercial hits clearly don’t deserve nominations,” says one source. “But because this year is so awful, in terms of rich, full female lead performances, they just might get them.”

One high-profile academy voter called the short list of female candidates “truly horrifying.”

“The absence of competition this year is just further proof that Hollywood does not value women, doesn’t care about them, doesn’t want to be bothered. Studio executives clearly believe that, aside from Julia Roberts, no female star can open a film and as a result, they don’t make that many movies with good female parts. This year is proof of that. It’s very disturbing.”

Added another academy voters: “The fact this year that movie stars like Jessica Lange and Glenn Close made TV movies is an indication that all is not right. These big stars are turning to television because clearly there are no great roles available to women in movies anymore with very few exceptions.” (One was “Night and the City,” which Lange starred in with Robert De Niro.)

Because of the small number of competitors this year for best actress, one industry source suggests that academy voters excavate the corridors of their memories and remember actresses who received good reviews in little-seen movies. “Take Goldie Hawn in ‘Criss Cross.’ That was a good performance but MGM just dumped that film.”

The box-office successes of “A League of Their Own” and “Sister Act” have buoyed the spirits of some observers, who hope that studio heads will take note that audiences will turn out to see female driven films and will resultingly greenlight more movie with complex female leads. But most say don’t count on it.

“The lack of leading female performances this year isn’t a one-year trend,” says one source. “It’s an industry reality.”