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: Because his father taught him not to involve in any (true loving) relationship in their line of work. Nicky knew they both fell truly for each other, so he decide to leave her for the sake of both of them. At the end scene, his father can be seen saying these things, and because of that mistake (losing focus) he took all his earned/stolen money.  <sep>  Q: Why did Nicky do what he did to Jess in New Orleans? A: Nicky knew they both fell truly for each other, so he decide to leave her for the sake of both of them  Q: I still don't understand why he would do that? A: Because his father taught him not to involve in any (true loving) relationship in their line of work  Q: Why did his father get involved? A: At the end scene, his father can be seen saying these things, and because of that mistake (losing focus) he took all his earned/stolen money  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Oh, so they were involved in something illegal?

Output: Yes


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever. An alternate (possibly revisionist) version of a movie cannot detract from the original viewing experience, it can only add an additional positive (or negative) experience. In the case of Ridley and Blade Runner, I have every version, and his “Final Cut” is my favorite, and I am pleased-giddy that he was able to get yet another version released. It is my opinion that, given 4+ versions, you have the luxury of choosing the one you enjoy most. You have nothing but upside! Any downside is for pessimists, or people who have undue hatred for capitalist who play their little games – while we are still free to play ours. In the case of his refusal to agree to a Director's Cut of Prometheus – that is cool too. I enjoy the fact that as an artist Ridley Scott wraps his arms fully around the meta concept of additional releases, and indeed incorporates that into the overall art – like Claude Monet's Water Lilies, or Haystacks – as long as HE is making the decisions. (You might argue the opposite for 99% of all other director/studio combos.)  <sep>  Q: Does Ridley Scott's Director's Cut releases hurt his movies? A: To a strong movie fan, no, it cannot hurt - ever  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What was his first director's cut?

Output: No


Input: Consider Input: CONTEXT: Usually these kinds of stunts are done by some trained stunt men (dupe for the hero), they wear protective gear like lunatic vests. Mostly, you can see car drag scenes on a flat surface, off-road (where the friction is gonna' be less compared to rubberised roads) as it can be easiy performed with necessary protective gear and by a trained stunt man. But when it comes to on-road, they get the help of Computer Graphics.  <sep>  Q: How are car drag scenes filmed without hurting anyone? A: Mostly, you can see car drag scenes on a flat surface, off-road (where the friction is gonna' be less compared to rubberised roads  Q: How do they not get hurt when they hit rocks or obstructions in the road? A: it can be easiy performed with necessary protective gear and by a trained stunt man  Q: When they are tied to the back of a vehicle how are their arms not hurt from being pulled? A: they wear protective gear like lunatic vests  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: is it considered dangerous to film these scenes?


Output: No