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:`.

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: I imagine that Jacob is referring to some aspect of himself. It could either be his 'past self' - i.e. Jacob before he learned to be a stylish womanizer, perhaps - or it could be the nice and sentimental part of him that still exists in his character. (We know that some part of him like that exists because he falls in love with Cal's daughter.) I imagine it is some combination of the two.  <sep>  Q: Who did Cal Weaver remind Jacob of in Crazy Stupid Love? A: I imagine that Jacob is referring to some aspect of himself. It could either be his 'past self  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: I am talking about when the first meet...is that what you are referring to?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: This is a case of two extremes. Remy Danton gets pulled over for speeding but doesn't have his license or registration on him. He asks the cop for a break but becomes a victim of racial profiling and is slammed on the hood of the car. After he tells the officers to "google" him to verify his identity, we see the opposite extreme and he is given special treatment due to his position by being let off the hook. He doesn't want to be judged or given particular treatment be it good or bad. He simply wants to be treated like a normal person like everyone else. Note this is my own analysis of the scene, I don't have any sources indicating that was the intended purpose of the scene but I think it was simply there for character arc development.  <sep>  Q: Why did Remy demand the speeding ticket?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: For a perfect clone, down to the quantum level, both would be the real Angier. That is the essence of his fear. The real Angier will be killed every time. When you download a movie what you are doing is actually making a perfect copy of the movie. Which is the real movie? They all are. This is very different from making copies of film reels where only the original have the quality of the original (each copy adds a little imperfection). Now, the question The Prestige asks is what if you can make a perfect clone of a person the way you can perfectly copy digital data? In one sense, if we don't want to get too uncomfortable we can always say the remaining copy is now the real data and the deleted copy is not real anymore. But if you really think about it and get out of your comfort zone you will realize that both people are real and what you have done is murdered yourself. In The Prestige this point is much more clearly made as the old copied Angier becomes the one who is killed. Not the newly created clone. Every time the clone will have only the memory of the surviving Angier. But every time Angier experiences death, only the Angier that experienced death has no way of passing that memory to the surviving Angier so the survivor can never know what dying feels like.  <sep>  Q: How does it work that the clones are sentient paradox? A: For a perfect clone, down to the quantum level, both would be the real Angier  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is the consciousness split among the various clones?
[EX A]:
Yes