Given a paragraph about movies, and a set of conversational question answers about the paragraph, answer a follow-up question from the paragraph. 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:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Being choked unconscious can result in short term memory loss. It is likely that Harvey Dent may not remember Rachel asking or the question. Or the assault. Choking someone out doesn't knock them out for very long either. It is possible Batman drugged Dent inside the panic room and then took him home later and he woke up in his own bed.  <sep>  Q: Did Harvey Dent know that it was Bruce Wayne who locked him up? A: It is likely that Harvey Dent may not remember Rachel asking or the question  Q: Who did Harvey think locked him up? A: Rachel  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Who actually locked Harvey up?

Output: Batman drugged Dent


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Spoiler It's pretty obvious from the blood on Fitts that he was the shooter. Also, there is a shot near the end of the film that shows Fitts' gun case sans a revolver which is seen earlier. These combined make it clear that Fitts is the shooter. Fitts believed that Lester was his son's gay lover. You may recall that there is a scene where Fitts sees his son and Lester in Lester's garage through the garage window, in what appears to be a compromising position. In fact, Fitts' son is merely rolling a joint while Lester reclines in a chair.  <sep>  Q: Who shot Lester Burnham in "American Beauty" (1999)? A: It's pretty obvious from the blood on Fitts that he was the shooter  Q: Does Fitts have a gun? A: Also, there is a shot near the end of the film that shows Fitts' gun case sans a revolver which is seen earlier  Q: Why did he shoot him? A: Fitts believed that Lester was his son's gay lover  Q: Why was that a problem? A: You may recall that there is a scene where Fitts sees his son and Lester in Lester's garage through the garage window, in what appears to be a compromising position  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Were they actually lovers?

Output: In fact, Fitts' son is merely rolling a joint while Lester reclines in a chair


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: It's simply a way to be able to search the full movie title without them [quite, though I'd check with a lawyer] breaking copyright. As these days most people use internet searches rather than physically browsing disks on a shelf, it gives them better chance of a hit. It's also a way of saving them having to think up anything vaguely clever or amusing. In the old days, they used to have to come up with vaguely similar titles that would be recognisable to their intended audience.. Jurassic Poke Saving Ryan's Privates Flesh Gordon Sex Family Robinson ...I think you get the idea.  <sep>  Q: What is the significance of "This Isn't" in porn parody titles? A: It's simply a way to be able to search the full movie title without them  Q: Is that legal for them to do? A: copyright  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: is there a way to tell the difference between a porn parody and the real movies?


Output: intended