TASK DEFINITION: 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:`.
PROBLEM: 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: Do the biopic-ized people get paid for being represented in their respective biopic movies?

SOLUTION: No

PROBLEM: CONTEXT: Apparently what happened is that Gere got too into character during the filming and repeatedly irritated Stallone. This came to a head when Gere, carrying a sandwich, got into a crowded car with Stallone despite Stallone's objections. Gere then proceeded to spill mustard out of the sandwich onto Stallone while eating and that was it for Stallone. He elbowed Gere out of the car and made an ultimatum to the director which resulted in Gere being fired.  <sep>  Q: What caused Sylvester Stallone to get into a fight with Richard Gere? A: Apparently what happened is that Gere got too into character during the filming and repeatedly irritated Stallone  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why was Gere fired intead of Stallone?

SOLUTION: Yes

PROBLEM: CONTEXT: I think it was worded that way for pragmatic reasons. Peter Jackson didn't want to tell the story of Sméagol until after the character Gollum was established. In The Fellowship of the Ring, the viewer is intended to see Gollum as a sort of beast. In The Two Towers, he has a much larger role and seems sort of halfway between beast and person, but a viewer who has not read the books is still unlikely to guess that he is a corrupted hobbit. The Return of the King opens with the story of Sméagol and Déagol to shed new light on who Gollum is, where he came from, why the Ring means so much to him, and what kind of influence the Ring wields over him. It is a bit of a shocking scene; the shock would not be nearly as strong if the viewer already knew Gollum's origin. So, in the opening of The Fellowship of the Ring, that Gollum was once a hobbit named Sméagol is an extraneous detail. While "the Ring came to Gollum" is an oversimplification, it was a necessary one; it told the viewer what he needed to know at that point in the story and no more.  <sep>  Q: Why does the narrator say 'The ring came to the creature Gollum'? A: In The Fellowship of the Ring, the viewer is intended to see Gollum as a sort of beast  Q: What wass the reason for making him appear as the beast? A: Peter Jackson didn't want to tell the story of Sméagol until after the character Gollum was established  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Was he corrupted before he got the ring?

SOLUTION:
No