Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.
--------
Question: CONTEXT: Estasi dell Anima was composed for the movie by David Sardy, there isn't a longer version. Searching through Spotify, I found Ennio Morricone's L'Estasi Dell'oro, which has a similar feel and might be an inspiration. It has similar instrumentation (discounting the electric guitar) and a driving beat with flourishes leading to a grand orchestral swell. It's 3:23 minutes long, might be helpful.  <sep>  Q: Was the track "Estasi Dell Anima" newly composed for "Zombieland"? A: I found Ennio Morricone's L'Estasi Dell'oro, which has a similar feel and might be an inspiration  Q: It's a great piece but too short...do you know if there is a longer rendition available? A: Estasi dell Anima was composed for the movie by David Sardy, there isn't a longer version  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there anything else you can tell me about Estasi Dell Anima?

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: I'd guess the movie's motive for not introducing the McKee subplot is because that was only a minor subplot of the book. And re-telling a book story in movie form, when you've got to get all the key details on screen in just 2 or 3 hours, means you have to omit many minor details. The core story of The Great Gatsby is about Gatsby and the world he lived in, not about Nick or Nick's potential attraction to Gatsby. In book form, there is plenty of room for the subplot suggestion that Nick is gay -- and the author Fitzgerald introduced the suggestion so subtly that most readers miss it. In the movie, however, throwing "Nick might be gay" at viewers along with everything else, in just 2 or 3 hours, could overwhelm them and/or distract from the core story -- and I'm not sure how it could be done as subtly on-screen as Fitzgerald pulled it off in the prose.  <sep>  Q: Why did the Great Gasby (2013) movie erase the hints of Nick Carraway's homosexuality?

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: In the books it is yet to be discovered if he is brought back to life for what greater purpose. But one thing is for sure, it isn't just one thing he did, but many. Probably in the books he is the one who kills the Night King, because it was clear from David Benioff's interview that they wanted to subvert expectations, they wanted someone who was not Jon to kill the Night King. So I think in the books he came back to life for also killing the NK. He was brought back to do a lot of things if you start to see it that way, a chain of events that led to a lot of things. Defeated Ramsay, showed the World that the dead are coming, prepared for the Long Night and battle of Winterfell. Successfully defeating NK would not have been possible without him. What the Lord of Light could have wanted? Well, we don't even know what LoL was, didn't know what his intentions were, who were his enemy but one thing we know for sure, all victories inevitably came at a cost. To bring a new World, Jon Snow had to stab his love in the belly. So there we have the Azor Ahai theory jumping in, not totally similar but was a good deal.  <sep>  Q: What was the purpose of bringing back Jon? A: He was brought back to do a lot of things if you start to see it that way, a chain of events that led to a lot of things  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Do you think it was to kill Daenerys?

Answer:
No