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:`.

[Q]: CONTEXT: George 'Babyface' Nelson is Achilles. You can read about it in Achilles and Baby Face Nelson: Modernization of Character in O Brother, Where Art Thou? by Carrie A. Alhelm-Sizelove. Nelson, like Achilles, is a person who fights for his ego and to gain fame. As Achilles fought in the Trojan war for fame, George is robbing banks during the Great Depression not to help the poor people but to get known. There is no deeper motive behind their doing. And George's Achilles' heel is his baby face.  <sep>  Q: Does Babyface Nelson represent anyone from The Odyssey?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: I believe there are two things going on here, one with the show, the second with the legal system. First, the show is about the Behavioral Analysis Unit. To capture their guy through interrogation seems wrong with the premise of the show. Using behavior is much more fitting. Second, in the US legal system, all incarcerated (arrested or imprisoned) individuals have the right to an attorney and the right to remain silent. An attorney would advise against them talking, while they both may chose not to talk. Putting either/both of them into a room(s) and interrogating them may not produce any information. Besides, it was far easier for the BAU to detect who was whom from the tick than spending hours in interrogation which may or may not have produced results.  <sep>  Q: Why the confusion over who was arrested in Criminal Minds? A: I believe there are two things going on here, one with the show, the second with the legal system  Q: Which is the more significant? A: First, the show is about the Behavioral Analysis Unit. To capture their guy through interrogation seems wrong with the premise of the show. Using behavior is much more fitting  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is this an aspect of the US justice system I don't know?
[A]: No


[Q]: CONTEXT: We don't know. We can't say specifically how time travel works in that universe. But we do know that the Jumanji game itself basically has magical powers and a certain control over reality. So, since it's not deemed important enough to mention in the movie, my best guess is that the magical game made it so everything happened as it happened. Basically the Back to the Future-school of time manipulation where it can affect very specific people in a very specific way.  <sep>  Q: What happens to the Jumanji game module between 1997 and 2017 in this new timeline?? A: So, since it's not deemed important enough to mention in the movie, my best guess is that the magical game made it so everything happened as it happened  Q: The four players join the game 20 years later. However who they are how they joined the game is not mentioned in the movie. A: We can't say specifically how time travel works in that universe. But we do know that the Jumanji game itself basically has magical powers and a certain control over reality  Q: How would he know where to put the module? A: We don't know  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: It would also need to be found by exactly these four people being unexpectedly together at the same time without anyone grabbing the module before
[A]:
Yes