MOVIES : Laying Down Bets in Oscar Town : ‘A Few Good Men,’ ‘Howards End’ and ‘Unforgiven’ are the early favorites in Hollywood buzz over the 1992 Academy Awards race

Trying to handicap the august Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences can be a humbling experience, but that is a large part of its lure. Like hard-core horseplayers who manage to crawl back to the $2 window no matter how bad a drubbing their selections receive, veteran Oscar watchers can’t help coming back year after year, trying to predict what the solons of cinema will select as their best of the season.

Figuring out the Oscar nominations would be tough enough even if the academy really did validate the year’s best work. As it is, having to factor in the voters’ peculiar predilections (the film should be successful, but not too successful, serious but not too serious) as well as the group’s ever-changing membership, the job can daunt all but the most experienced--or the most foolhardy.

This year, with the Feb. 17 nominations still five weeks and change away, a canvassing of some of the most venerable of Oscar watchers has resulted in a surprising consensus. When it comes to the top categories--best picture, director, the four acting slots and the two screenwriting ones--three films emerge as sure things not only for best picture nominations, but to earn nominations in at least half of the eight majors as well.

Best Picture: The sure shots are “Unforgiven,” “Howards End” and “A Few Good Men.” Directed by and starring Clint Eastwood, “Unforgiven” has managed the rare trifecta of critical approbation, an impressive $75 million at the box office and the imprimatur of a major Establishment star. “Howards End,” handicapped a bit by its early-in-the-year release, is as good as art-house filmmaking gets, the latest film by the Merchant-Ivory-Jhabvala team whose previous E.M. Forster adaptation, “A Room With a View,” garnered eight nominations and won three awards.

“A Few Good Men,” which most people consider the early favorite to actually win best picture, presents a curious case. An effective piece of high-powered popular entertainment that takes itself more seriously than it needs to (certainly no sin in Hollywood), “Men” is shaping up as a kind of silent majority choice. “I wasn’t passionate about it,” is a common industry remark, “but people love it.” And so they probably do.

The last two slots present more of a challenge to fill. Though it was all but ignored by the tony critics’ groups, “A River Runs Through It” has proved surprisingly feisty at the box office and, with ample supplies of the sort of respectability and/or predictability the academy favors, should get nod No. 4.

The biggest best picture question mark is Spike Lee’s epic “Malcolm X.” Handsomely made and non-confrontational in tone, it plays like it was put together specifically for consideration by the academy, a group that likes to feel it’s making a social statement with its vote. Unfortunately for the film’s chances, it has not proved durable at the box office and, unlike last year’s multi-nominated “JFK,” the controversy surrounding it largely took place before the film opened.

Aside from “Howards End,” two other independent films are potential nominees. “The Player” has earned a more than respectable $20 million and has been one of the year’s most-written-about films. But its adherents appear to be primarily in the New York side of the academy, and though mainstream Hollywood always likes to be talked about, it’s not clear it wants to be talked about in quite this way.

More of a long shot but one that increasingly looks like it might come in is Neil Jordan’s “The Crying Game.” A familiar story told with a new kind of panache, “The Crying Game” is peaking at just the right time. It is the only film that seems to be generating industry excitement at the moment, and if everything breaks right, it just might get that fifth and final nomination.

Best Director: Inevitably paralleling, up to a point, the best picture selections, nominations here should go to Clint Eastwood for “Unforgiven,” James Ivory for “Howards End,” Rob Reiner for “A Few Good Men” as well as Robert Redford for “A River Runs Through It.” If anyone else but Spike Lee had directed “Malcolm X,” a nomination would surely be forthcoming, but industryites say that the directing branch feels the same way toward him as it does toward Barbra Streisand, so that one looks much more iffy.

Competition for the fifth slot could then come down to a trio of very interesting choices. Neil Jordan could get a nod for “The Crying Game,” as could George Miller for the very strong job he did with difficult material in “Lorenzo’s Oil.” The biggest question is whether Robert Altman, who has never won an Oscar and hasn’t been nominated since “Nashville” in 1975, can parlay out-of-town kudos like the best director award at Cannes into some overdue hometown recognition.

Best Actor: The only group where all five nominees can be predicted with relative confidence, starting with Clint Eastwood in a career-defining role in “Unforgiven.” On screen for almost every minute of its more than three-hour length, Denzel Washington is appropriately impressive in “Malcolm X,” as is Robert Downey Jr. in the title role of the otherwise lackluster “Chaplin.”

Jack Lemmon, a perennial academy favorite, should get nominated again for “Glengarry Glen Ross,” and Al Pacino, nominated five previous times without a victory, roars through “Scent of a Woman” like he knows the sixth time will be the charm. If the academy likes him enough, he might carry the film to several other nominations, including an outside shot at best picture.

If any of these should chance to falter, other possibilities include Jack Nicholson in “Hoffa,” Tom Cruise in “A Few Good Men,” maybe even Tim Robbins in “The Player” or Daniel Day-Lewis in “The Last of the Mohicans.” Though both Harvey Keitel in “Bad Lieutenant” and Seymour Cassel in “In the Soup” did some of the best work of their careers, the films have probably not been seen widely enough to garner nominations.

Best Actress: The dilemma here is not what’s going to happen but what’s going to happen to Michelle Pfeiffer. Her turn in “Batman Returns” was the best thing in the movie, but though it has the heft of a supporting performance, the studio is pushing her for best actress. On the other hand, “Love Field” features a classic best actress performance, but it’s not clear if enough academy members will have seen the film to make it count.

Aside from Pfeiffer in one form or another, three other actresses probably have a lock on nominations. Emma Thompson seems to be the focus of the “Howards End” enthusiasm, winning that category in all three major critics groups as well as the National Board of Review. Susan Sarandon gives a terrifically strong performance in “Lorenzo’s Oil,” and Shirley MacLaine, another academy favorite with five nominations so far, is equally indomitable in “Used People.”

The final spot, once again, is up for grabs. The strongest possibility is Geena Davis in “A League of Their Own,” while longer odds can be placed on everybody from Meryl Streep (“Death Becomes Her”) to Catherine Deneuve (“Indochine”) and even Whoopi Goldberg (“Sister Act”).

Best Supporting Actor: Both Gene Hackman in “Unforgiven” and Nicholson in “A Few Good Men” are sure things in this category, and Nicholson’s nomination will give him a nice round 10, pushing him past Spencer Tracy and into a tie with Laurence Olivier for career most.

If Nicholson doesn’t become the first male actor to ever get two nominations for different roles in the same year, Pacino should do it with his work in “Glengarry Glen Ross.” Contending for the final two slots are a whole raft of men, including Tom Hanks in “A League of Their Own,” Anthony Hopkins in “Howards End,” David Paymer in “Mr. Saturday Night” (though he’ll be hurt by the film’s failure) and, if “Scent of a Woman” sentiment turns out to be strong, Pacino’s co-star Chris O’Donnell. Despite his verbal brilliance, sentiment for Robin Williams’ nomination for “Aladdin” has not yet made itself felt.

Best Supporting Actress: The only sure nominee here is Judy Davis, everybody’s favorite neurotic in “Husbands and Wives.” Miranda Richardson is a good bet, probably more likely for “Damage” than for “Enchanted April,” though the latter is as possible for her as it is for Joan Plowright. Vanessa Redgrave should round out the Brit contingent with “Howards End.” The year’s most overlooked supporting performance, Alfre Woodard’s superb work in “Passion Fish,” comes in this category, and if there is any justice the academy will search it out and appropriately reward it.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Much the more crowded of the two categories this year, with a trio of sure nominations: Ruth Prawer Jhabvala (who won for “A Room With a View”) for “Howards End,” Aaron Sorkin for “A Few Good Men” and Michael Tolkin for “The Player.” Almost as likely are Hollywood veteran Bo Goldman for “Scent of A Woman” and Richard Friedenberg for “A River Runs Through It,” while a bit more of a long shot is David Mamet for “Glengarry Glen Ross.”

Best Original Screenplay: Though David Webb Peoples’ “Unforgiven” and Neil Jordan’s “The Crying Game” are two of the strongest scripts in years and sure nominees, everything gets very murky after that. George Miller and Nick Enright’s “Lorenzo’s Oil” script is excellent, but the difficult material may keep voters away, and Tim Robbins’ tart “Bob Roberts” may be too little seen as well.

If forced to the wall, the writers may resort to voting for familiar names like John Sayles (“Passion Fish”) and David Mamet, though his script for “Hoffa” is the film’s weakest point. Ironically, one of the year’s best original scripts, Woody Allen’s for “Husbands and Wives,” probably won’t get the recognition it should because it’s perceived as being too close to a very messy reality. Only in Hollywood. . . .

* CRITICAL MASS: Calendar polls 106 critics around the country on the best films of 1992. Page 21