‘Chicago’ shouldn’t have won best picture in 2003. Here’s what should have
LOS ANGELES — There’s a case to be made that Oscars should be awarded not a few months but a few years after the movies are released. Maybe even 20 years, so as to weed out the overpraised clunkers, elevate the overlooked gems and ensure that the winners truly stand the test of time.
With that in mind, on the 20th anniversary of the 2003 Oscars, L.A. Times columnist Glenn Whipp and film critic Justin Chang looked back at the top eight categories and had a spirited discussion of what should have won — and what should have been nominated.
Best picture
“Chicago” (winner)
“Gangs of New York”
“The Hours”
“The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”
“The Pianist”
CHANG: Given its three shocking wins for adapted screenplay, lead actor and director, it seems safe to say that “The Pianist” came much closer to unseating the heavily favored “Chicago” for best picture than anyone expected. And it absolutely should have — it was the best of the five nominees, with
