I was confused by those names at first. In fact, in every movie, the female host will get to know the male host first, and then analyze the psychology of the male host first. Therefore, the woman said that the man's case eight years ago means that the man always knew that the criminal was dangerous, but in order to give his friend five chances to catch the drug Lord, he let the criminal kill his pregnant girlfriend. So the man blamed himself and never wanted to talk about it again. But everything was killed by the woman, and the man was admitted to the hospital after being accused of mental problems.

The plot that the female host said is all imagined by the male host, that is to say, the female host planned it like this in order to write a novel. So the man learned from the opposite side of the novel that the woman planned to make herself a scapegoat from the beginning. So I ended up laughing strangely.

I think so, but not as emotional as the first one. I don't know why, because I was influenced by the first one. At first glance, I thought it was the same number of sets, thinking that everyone was killed by a woman. However, if so, the director is too boring.

So I think the ending is either a cliche, and the woman is the culprit. Or reverse this time. ...

So after the woman found out the man's plan, the man smiled ~

Because the book says: without the man, the woman can't preside over many things ~

So I think the second part is to make people mistakenly think that the female host planned all this ~

However, it is actually that man who is the murderer ~

I don't know if this is the case ~