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 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 <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did his father get involved?

Ex Output:
Yes

Ex Input:
CONTEXT: After some searching around finally found it: Polonaise in A-flat major, Op. 53, by Chopin, known as "Heroic" The piece is famous for being extremely difficult and is often included in standard repetoires of professional pianists to demonstrate their skill. In the context of the movie, it demonstrates the mad Moreau's obsession with music and is emblematic of his misguided genius, playing on, oblivious to all, detached from reality of the monstrosity of the island. (In the film, actor Brando is not actually playing the piano, but just fingering the keys to a recording.) <sep> Q: In the Island of Dr. Moreau (1996) Marlon Brando's character plays what piece on the piano? A: Polonaise in A-flat major, Op. 53, by Chopin, known as "Heroic <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is Polonaise?

Ex Output:
Yes

Ex Input:
CONTEXT: I'd guess the movie's motive for not introducing the McKee subplot is because that was only a minor subplot of the book. And re-telling a book story in movie form, when you've got to get all the key details on screen in just 2 or 3 hours, means you have to omit many minor details. The core story of The Great Gatsby is about Gatsby and the world he lived in, not about Nick or Nick's potential attraction to Gatsby. In book form, there is plenty of room for the subplot suggestion that Nick is gay -- and the author Fitzgerald introduced the suggestion so subtly that most readers miss it. In the movie, however, throwing "Nick might be gay" at viewers along with everything else, in just 2 or 3 hours, could overwhelm them and/or distract from the core story -- and I'm not sure how it could be done as subtly on-screen as Fitzgerald pulled it off in the prose. <sep> Q: Why did the Great Gasby (2013) movie erase the hints of Nick Carraway's homosexuality? A: I'd guess the movie's motive for not introducing the McKee subplot is because that was only a minor subplot of the book Q: Why would the writer include this subplot in the book? A: In book form, there is plenty of room for the subplot suggestion that Nick is gay -- and the author Fitzgerald introduced the suggestion so subtly that most readers miss it <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Did the director choose not to include this on purpose?

Ex Output:
Yes