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:`.

Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: If snowballs and Twinkies still survive, then I would presume that there was also plenty of tinned and dried food to be found in shops and warehouses. I'm also fairly sure that, despite the zombies, there was plenty of electricity (the movie doesn't make clear whether this is from local generators or from the grid, but there is clearly electricity in many scenes including the theme park at the end) so frozen food will still be available. It is not a serious movie and it would probably be petty to point out the inconsistency of the existence of network power in a world dominated by zombies where nobody is running the power plants or maintaining the grid. It certainly didn't detract from my enjoyment of the movie.  <sep>  Q: What do main characters survive on during the zombie apocalypse?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: He was talking about the entire source code project (getting in someone else's body) and trying to explain to her what was really going on to make her understand/help him. As he realizes his actions might seem strange, he tries to convince her to go with it. She dismisses it as it doesn't seem important (only dreams) and flirts with him  <sep>  Q: What does the conversation mean?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: From reading the article that @Richard has linked in the comments, it is clear that there certainly is a subtext of a homoerotic nature between the two characters Mr. Orange and Mr. White. That's almost indisputable. However I never interpreted it that way when I watched it, I just assumed it was simply the building of a mutual respect, and a mentor/mentee relationship. However, as the article goes on to say that their relationship is similar to “wakashudo”, and knowing Tarantino's affinity with samurai culture (which he made 2 films about) it is very possible that this is the relationship dynamic he intended to portray. Of course, like most movies, it is open to interpretation. Therefore whilst the subtext is certainly there, and it was almost certainly intended that way by the writer/director, it is also subtle enough so that it doesn't necessarily force the audience to interpret the movie that way.  <sep>  Q: Relationship between “Mr. Orange” and “Mr. White” in "Reservoir Dogs"? A: it is clear that there certainly is a subtext of a homoerotic nature between the two characters Mr. Orange and Mr. White  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Who says "Gay subtext always makes movies better?


Output: Yes