I have a basic understanding of the Liar Paradox, most of it taken from late night TV and various discussions with mates - but i'm unsure as to how my knowledge fairs...so;
The next sentance is false.
The previous sentance is true.

That would be paradoxical, since it has no litteral way to take it as truth.

With your example;
If the statement is true, then everything inside it must be true, but in that it says it's false, it contradicts itself; It's neither true or false.

but as i said; my knowledge is about 30mins worth of explanation from a few people who did philosophy A-level for 2 years. So it's mostly likely incorrect or lacking the key point of the exercise