Real-life married couple, cowriters and codirectors, American Alex Huston Fischer and Australian Eleanor Wilson, adapt Ursula Willis-Jones’ short story, “The Wicker Husband,” for their sophomore film, “Wicker” (2026). Tired of being the town’s laughingstock, the Fisherwoman (Olivia Colman) pays the Basket Weaver (Peter Dinklage) to make her a husband. A month later, she meets her husband, the Wicker Husband (Alexander Skarsgård), and realizes that he surpassed her expectations. Their happiness disrupts the townspeople as they realize that the newlyweds are genuinely happy and their lives pale in comparison. Will the couple be able to stay happy under the pressure of outside forces? Marketed like a Harlequin romance, it is an incredibly thoughtful movie about how allowing societal expectations to affect your life is a recipe for a miserable existence.
Casting Academy Award winner Colman in any role is a guarantee that she will not only nail the role but elevate it. Though she is instantly recognizable, she can use her emotions to embody her characters from her mischievous, adorable smile, her radiant happiness emitting from inside or a glowering look of burning anger. As the Fisherwoman, she gets styled as a woman who prioritizes her work over her appearance and only makes herself happy with simple pleasures without putting on airs. The Fisherwoman is fair game for the men’s rude comments and the women’s snide ones. Everyone in the village is comfortable with her at the bottom of the hierarchy so when her fortune changes, they feel low for thinking that they are better than her but seeing that objectively, she is living better than them. “Wicker” alternates between her perspective and the villagers’ point of view. Even though her life improves, the earlier harm does not evaporate, and the story embeds an important idea about who gets harmed when someone does not deal with their past trauma and the pitfalls of treating a person like a belonging.
Is the key to world peace finding common ground? Should the accord meetings start with a list then place Skarsgård at the top? “Wicker” is not the first movie with a protagonist thrilled at winning the lottery of getting to sleep with one of Skarsgård’s characters, but unlike his role in “Pillion” (2025), the Wicker Husband is an innocent. He is so thrilled with being alive and does not take any sensation or moment for granted that he instinctually adores the Fisherwoman. Unlike “Pillion,” the Wicker Husband’s looks are not the ideal, but his character and absolute love and devotion are. He is the moral compass of the film, and when he has a drink at the local inn with the other men, he is genuinely shocked at how they talk about their wives and how they treat them. He introduces the novel concept of happy wife, happy life. The movie shows the limits of one-sided love and to what he can fix. Most actors would not be able to emote underneath all that wood, but Skarsgård needs more credit for fully utilizing his physicality, his eyes and voice to craft his character. It is a brilliant performance.
Another facet of common ground is the universal agreement of which Americans get to have British accents (Gillian Anderson, Gwyneth Paltrow, Renee Zellweger) without facing ridicule and which do not (Madonna). Whether it is because of biography, talent or quality of acting, Dinklage belongs in the prior category. His character is interesting and given to random solitary soliloquies, which feels a little indulgent, but improves upon repeat viewing. He sells it even when it is a thinly disguised prose dump. If you are hoping to find out how the Basket Weaver works his magic, do not. It appears to be related to the moon, but it is a nice change of pace to have a man so credibly connected to nature in film.
If you go into “Wicker” expecting that Dinklage is going to be the standout among the supporting cast, you would be wrong. That distinction belongs to Elizabeth Debicki who plays The Tailor’s Wife, maiden name The Doctor’s Daughter, who is the town’s queen bee and is the most miserable at someone else’s happiness. Everyone’s name is based on their profession or their closest male relative’s profession. She delivers an understated, measured performance that eventually hits a crescendo before pulling back. Fischer and Wilson perfectly capture why someone who seems to have everything would be most bothered. If she cannot get what she wants, then she can make sure that no one does even if there is zero correlation with the cause of her troubles.
The rest of the cast is perfect and provides a lot of comedic relief and room for pathos. Richard E. Grant makes a cameo as the incompetent doctor. Fischer and Wilson lay a foundation of bawdy humor, much like the marketing campaign, before stopping the jokes. The customs are quite inventive, as if someone has explored if they are rooted in actual historical accounts, please send that story my way. “Touch your biggest tit.” Was it improv? In the end, the lesson is that the men are also victims of a patriarchy even if they do get some of the benefits.
The sound design in “Wicker” is consistently top notch. The sound of flies buzzing symbolizes the corrupting influence of a wicked tongue. The crackle of a roaring hearth signifies a brain calculating ideas. The sound of wood moving echoes the natural sound of trees moving because of the wind but also functions as a bawdy joke. Visually cinematographer Lol Crawley harmonizes the mood of the story with the seasons. Editor Sofi Marshall has the heaviest lift during the beginning of the story intercutting between the creation of the Wicker Husband with the Fisherwoman sleeping and subliminally helping with the process as her subconscious sexual desires help warm the heat that makes the willow wood malleable.
Without reading the source material, it is hard to determine who slightly fumbled the ball as it approaches the denouement. There is a point when a character does something irredeemable, which means a happy ending for that person feels like a pulled punch. Their moment of redemption seems like an eternal nightmare curse, not heartwarming, and like paying someone else’s credit card bill after burning all your money.
Can a movie solve the loneliness epidemic? If movie goers pay attention to the story and its lessons, “Wicker” could be a great primer on how to be a better mate and have a more enjoyable life; however, if you are just going for the low brow humor, you will be more than satisfied. If you are prude, even without nudity, the enthusiastic and perfunctory sexual situations will scandalize you. There is a lot of graphic language, including profanity, so if that is a deal breaker, consider yourself warned. This movie is not for kids, just adults. Also show that same energy of concern about splinters when you are watching “The Evil Dead” (1981).
