Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I expected a different unmasking of a fraudulent surgeon. I was interested to know if there was real medical science supporting the experimental surgeries proposed, and sadly performed, by what by everything here indicates to be a narcissistic sociopathic, and criminal, doctor.
What the film revolves around, and said title of "love" signals, is the gullibility of a journalist name Benita. She never admits to being an easy mark by her own actions parking so many calls to reality. I'm just not that interested in how a charming charlatan can fool what obviously is a vulnerable woman who seems to take no blame for her situation.
The story that would play better is her devastation in being so easy to foo. You know, a scorned woman's fury propelling her to dig deep into how this man could do transplant procedures with aiding and abetting medical centers never reviewing test data. It seems there was no data at all, faked or otherwise, when these procedures were allowed. How? Is there actually any data ever showing anything remotely similar has worked in animals? With horrific results how did the doctor manage to continue as long as he did? None of this is answered.
If the viewer is satisfied with a Casanova quack doctor fooling women into terrible consequences, well that is, for the most part, this film.