It's very entertaining and more spectacular than Knives Out. Much of what the script does is smart and well constructed, but much also depends on coincidences and script choices that could have gone in a completely opposite direction. It really felt contrived.

Some things are hard to explain. How do *THAT* thing happens and only one person knows keeping it a secret from the public? Especially considering it was a famous person and considering how important - with many connections - all the others are? Why doesn't the murderer do exactly what he did earlier, taking some characters out of the game? Why did he allow this story to come to that conclusion which may be as satisfying to see as it is unrealistic, cheesy and implausible?

The social commentary is still great. Maybe even better than in the first one. I also really liked most of the cast, especially Janelle Monáe and Kate Hudson, but others are sometimes overacting (yes, including Norton). Is it the tone of the film? I confess that I prefer the tone - even more than the structure - of Knives Out. Knives Out entertains, and incorporates a lot of humor, but doesn't fall into such an absurd field of improbability. Glass Onion is funnier, has hilarious cameos, and brings interesting technological innovations, looking like we are almost in a Bond movie. I also like that it plays a little with the structure, although the first act is too long (a whodunit in which there is no dunit until an hour into the film). I like above all that it wanted to be different, but I prefer that the next chapter turn back to something more grounded. Glass Onion sometimes suffers from being a sequel always looking for more and more.

I admit that judging by critics' reviews I expected to be more satisfied by this. It is a good time in the cinema and the events are presented to us in a quite interesting way. However, the killer reveal was predictable and does too many things that seem to parody the genre more than giving it a new and original twist.