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: The purpose of the end scene of the movie is to have the Narrator finally conquer his 'problems' in the form of killing Tyler. He cannot simply shoot at him as he is just a hallucination of his own mind and the bullet would just fly off into nothing. While before beating him up would have worked, it was just a physical representation of a mental battle. By bringing in an actual object into the fray, his attempts at Tyler's life are pointless. We see the Narrator finally realize that he has been in control all along and this is why he is presented able to take the gun from Tyler, because he is the one actually holding the gun. It is then he realizes that he must follow Tyler's own advice and "hit bottom". Only by doing so, is he able to control his own body and "kill" Tyler. To hit bottom he realizes he must do something life-threatening and plain insane. Whereas the bullet only blew a hole in his cheek, it was his mental F--- You to Tyler, showing him that he can take care of himself now, which is why the bullet is shown to have gone through the back of Tyler's head, killing him. <sep> Q: How/Why did Tyler Durden got shot in the head? A: The purpose of the end scene of the movie is to have the Narrator finally conquer his 'problems' in the form of killing Tyler Q: So, that is the reason he was shot in the head? A: it was his mental F--- You to Tyler Q: Okay, but the narrator was shot in the mouth, so was that to shut him up...per se? A: Whereas the bullet only blew a hole in his cheek, it was his mental F--- You to Tyler, showing him that he can take care of himself now <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Wasn't Tyler just a hallucination though?

A: Yes
****
Q: CONTEXT: The answer to that question is; no one will ever know. David Lynch knew he was onto something ethereal, so he prohibited any promotional photos of the baby and forced his SE crew to sign a release saying they could never talk about it. Lynch, himself, has always been elusive at best. All anyone will ever have is speculation, until Lynch decides to spill the beans. I want to add that the idea that the baby was living tissue has 2 main roadblocks; decomposition and Rigor Mortis. It is highly unlikely the baby was actually living tissue, though it may have been modeled on such. I have seen mention that it somewhat resembles a sheep fetus, so that may have been the vision Lynch worked from. Lynch would have needed several such fetuses for multiple days of filming, which just doesn't seem plausable. <sep> Q: What is the Eraserhead baby? A: The answer to that question is; no one will ever know Q: Where was the baby born? A: It is highly unlikely the baby was actually living tissue Q: How was the baby created? A: it somewhat resembles a sheep fetus, so that may have been the vision Lynch worked from <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What was the baby made out of?

A: No
****
Q: CONTEXT: You didn't miss anything; you just caught something that probably doesn't matter. This never shows up or comes up in any subsequent episodes. I assume it's supposed to be simply George's breath/vapor from exhaling - just not done very well! It's so short that it might also just be a reflection mistake when filming. Incidentally, unless there's a "pilot" episode on the DVDs that I'm not aware of, this scene actually occurs in episode 2. <sep> Q: Why does the werewolf exhale a green mist? A: I assume it's supposed to be simply George's breath/vapor from exhaling - just not done very well Q: Does he exhale the mist in multiple episodes or one time only? A: This never shows up or comes up in any subsequent episodes <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: do you think there is a specific reason it happened in 1 episode only?

A:
Yes
****