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: Her ability to levitate herself comes out of nowhere in the movie, I assume to enhance her dramatic entrance in the final scene. So there's no real explanation for why she doesn't ever try to do it earlier. In particular, there were times when levitating herself would have been very useful, such as when she needed Vision to fly her out of the train car as Slokovia fell. However, Wanda's major character development during the course of the movie is that she starts out, under Ultron's guidance, as a misguided villain, until her time spend with the rest of the Avengers eventually redeems her. You will notice that, during the first half of the movie, she almost exclusively uses her mental manipulation power. It's only after she starts spending time with people like Captain America and Hawkeye that she starts to embrace her other powers, like stopping the train, or using hex-bolts on Ultron clones. It seems likely that the Avengers have been helping her explore her abilities, and become better at using them. It may be as simple as her not knowing she could levitate until someone else convinced her to try.  <sep>  Q: Hello, if Scarlet Witch of MCU has the ability to fly, why didn't she attempt to fly earlier?

A: Yes
****
Q: CONTEXT: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it. The gun was also Barr's as was the van. The whole point of Charlie's actions were to frame Barr for the killing. He had befriended Barr to get close to him and was close enough to be able to drug him and take the various pieces of property away from Barr's house and to return them with incriminating evidence without Barr realising he'd been set up. If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk. Presumably Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence in the multi-story car park.  <sep>  Q: How did Charlie get Barr Finger prints? A: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it  Q: How does that explain the scene with the coin? A: If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk  Q: Did he use the coin to get the prints? A: Presumably Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence in the multi-story car park  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Oh right I see, what about the scene in general, can you explain more?

A: Yes
****
Q: CONTEXT: The bleach is for Trevor to clean his apartment with. Because he cannot sleep, I can only assume he turned his mind to something to keep him distracted; hence over-cleaning his apartment. He probably did not notice the blood as because the fish were from the trip that we can assume he was coming home from when he killed 'Nicholas'. He probably was so shocked from this crime that he shoved the fish into the freezer and forgot about them as his mind began to shut down over the course of the next year. I don't believe it is explicitly shown that this has occurred during the whole year, but at the very end when Trevor is trying to find Ivan, when he stops caring about his apartment due to his manhunt is when this occurs.  <sep>  Q: What is wrong with the bleach and the fish in the Machinist? A: The bleach is for Trevor to clean his apartment with. Because he cannot sleep, I can only assume he turned his mind to something to keep him distracted; hence over-cleaning his apartment  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is the relationship between the bleach and the plot?

A:
Yes
****