We're supposed to believe that Helen Hunt's character fell profoundly, weepingly in love with "Mahhk" in a mere 4 sessions?
Room for one more, honey.
So we're supposed to...
... answer such a stupid and shallow question?
Seriously though. You've never been in love, I feel bad for you.
For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco
I don't know if she 'fell' in love with him as much as she loved him. There is a difference.
I bet she normally didn't get attached to patients and she saw something in mark that was endearing and she allowed herself to feel something for him.
If it were 5 it would it have been more believable?
That's the greatness of this movie: love is so simple actually. It just happens anyhow, anywhere. It's just our minds and society who are complicating it afterwards.
We can't be lost; we don't know where we're going.
All that matters is that we're going.
Just because she said, "I love you," and cried about leaving him doesn't mean she fell "profoundly and weepingly" in love with him -- sheesh! What it looked like to me was her sensing the beginnings of love, i.e., the possibility of falling in love with him and, therefore, the need to detach sooner rather than later from him. I think her crying was more than just, "I love him." It was more complicated, since she was caught between him and her relationship with her husband, as well as having experienced great intimacy with him (not just "sex"). So yeah, I bought it.
I agree with you, I don't feel she particularly "fell in love" (romantically) for him as much as she was touched by his soul and the sadness of his situation. I feel her tears in the station wagon are more being moved by the plight of this gentle, kind man who she can grown to care about deeply.
share