I will say, in Physics, I have never heard this advice. I will also say that I have never, ever, heard anything resembling "1 review article is more important than 5 research articles in a job application." I've been impressed by seeing a review when it is Nature, Science, or Rev. Mod. Phys. - though of course it often indicates the advisor's reputation, rather than the candidate's. However, I can also think of a few times when it makes sense to dedicate some efforts to review articles rather than original research, and I did end up writing one as I was applying for jobs.
1) You have been invited to write a review by a journal with a decent reputation in your field. Doing so demonstrates you are taken seriously by the field, and scientists care about your opinion.
2) You are a few months from a job/grant application, and you think you can write/publish the review within this time, but probably won't be able to publish a significant original research article before the application goes in. A review is better than nothing.
3) Your research plans for the future are focused on an emerging field, and your review gives you a chance to both plant your flag and emphasize how important that field is to a broader audience.
If all three points are mostly there, and there aren't other major holes in your CV/application (teaching, details of your research plan, grant-writing), consider it! Beware, though - I found out writing a good review takes more time than you expect, so Point #2 might not be a slam dunk.