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:`.

CONTEXT: Louise has a unique understanding of the language. Many of the scientists have worked out some of the vocabulary and seem to have made some progress in communication. But Louise has immersed herself more in the language than the others. But the implications are not apparent until very late. In a final splurge of communication, done as the scientists start to panic about the reaction of the other nations to the partial communications they have interpreted, the aliens send a very rich message: not one word but a whole screenful of words. Nobody can make sense of it until Louise has a moment of insight and can read it all and get the point of it. Only at this moment does the full intent of the language have an effect on her: and when it does it rewrites her sense of time. She then uses this knowledge of the future to avert a potential catastrophe. We only see the implications of this in the postscript (which may be actually her memory of the future) where many of the players meet for the first time at a celebration of her book on the language and one of them triggers her memory of what she did to talk down the hostility. The key point is that she is the first person to completely grasp the alien language and therefore the first to experience its ability to undo her brain's sense of linear time.  <sep>  Q: Why was Louise the only one who advances her mind? A: The key point is that she is the first person to completely grasp the alien language and therefore the first to experience its ability to undo her brain's sense of linear time  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: was this a good movie?
No

CONTEXT: As we later discover in the movie, you can alter the laws of nature because the world we are living is not exactly real. So the ones communicating with Neo know how to do this. I think that's what the filmmakers are trying to say here. Someone who does not obey to the physical laws is trying to communicate with Neo. So I guess this was not them being cheap rather than trying to stress this 'supernatural' element of the one behind the messages.  <sep>  Q: Why wasn't Neo's monitor connected to anything? A: As we later discover in the movie, you can alter the laws of nature because the world we are living is not exactly real  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there any symbolism involved here?
Yes

CONTEXT: The rights issue is still fairly murky. If a program or film is deemed 'newsworthy' (ie documentary) then less rights need to be secured (although privacy copyrights are still in effect and do need to cleared before presentation). Biopics like Ed Wood, despite being based on a real person, are considered 'fictional entertainment' and thus do not require clearance from the family unless real photos/sounds are used. In some cases, biopics can be halted - for example, the Amy Winehouse project that has been stalled because her father has refused to release the rights to her music.  <sep>  Q: I think they should based on movies being about their life. do you agree? A: The rights issue is still fairly murky  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: I mean if someone did a movie about your life, would you want to get paid for it?

No