Ever feel like you're watching a movie and thinking, 'What was the point?' That's the feeling this review of 'Rental Family' evokes, a film where Brendan Fraser finds himself adrift in a sea of Japanese role-play drama. The film, directed by Hikari, attempts to explore the world of 'rental families,' a real-life phenomenon in Japan where individuals can hire actors to fill roles in their lives. But does it succeed? Let's dive in.
Fraser plays Phillip, an American actor who inexplicably ends up in Tokyo after a toothpaste commercial gig. With no family or friends, he stumbles into a bizarre line of work: becoming a 'rental family' member. These services, mirroring actual businesses in Japan, offer bespoke role-playing experiences, from stand-in spouses to deceased loved ones, all for therapeutic purposes.
Phillip's roles are as strange as they are varied. He's tasked with being a father figure for a young girl needing a 'dad' for a school interview, and a mock son for an aging actor. But here's where it gets controversial: the film presents this concept with a startling lack of depth, and a heavy dose of sentimentality.
The reviewer points out the film's shortcomings, especially when compared to similar explorations. Werner Herzog's 'Family Romance, LLC' from 2019, and Yorgos Lanthimos's 'Alps' (though not directly related to rental families) both delve into the unsettling nature of this practice, highlighting the potential for emotional damage. The reviewer found both films uncertain, perhaps because there is something uncomfortable about adding a layer of role play to the existing play-acting of fictional films.
The movie's biggest problem? Its tone. It attempts to be a feel-good story, but the reviewer finds it shallow, filled with platitudes about playing roles. Phillip's roles include pretending to be a groom for a young woman hiding a secret from her parents. And this is the part most people miss: the film doesn't seem to question the morality of the situation. Should she be lying to her parents? The film's lighthearted approach feels at odds with the potential for real emotional consequences.
The reviewer also questions Phillip's willingness to risk the little girl's feelings by pretending to be her father, while seemingly disregarding the older actor's emotions. The film's 'smug' and 'saccharine' tone leaves the reviewer with a sense of unease.
What do you think? Does the film's premise warrant a more critical approach? Are you bothered by the film's lack of depth, or do you find its feel-good approach refreshing? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
