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:'.

CONTEXT: The point of the scene was to show that she has the power to command others when she makes physical contact and that Wolverine doesn't know she has powers. She denies having power because she doesn't want him to know. She's trying to manipulate him for Stryker and Sabretooth so if Wolverine found out it would ruin the plan. EDIT: modified answer to remove mention of Wolverine being immune to Kayla's powers since it's unclear whether he is immune or not. <sep> Q: What was the point of the bridge scene? A: The point of the scene was to show that she has the power to command others Q: What can you tell me about Wolverine? A: Wolverine doesn't know she has powers <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What else does Wolverine not know?
Yes

CONTEXT: While we will never know as neither boat used their detonator, I would suggest that they had each others, going purely on what was shown and what the film makers were trying to say. The Joker's previous 'gag' - which also failed - was to try and get Gothamites to kill each other for own protection or self interest as he believed it would demonstrate a general moral bankruptcy. 'You failed to kill the lawyer...' - I cannot remember how the rest of the line goes but the boat finale appears to come from a desire to repeat the exercise and Batman puts the emphasis on all of this in his final rebuke. The film also goes a long way to show that both sets of passengers specifically reject the opportunity to kill each other - even for self defence. If a comic source for this plot line does actually show this as a double - bluff then it is still irrelevant to what was actually said and shown in 'The Dark Knight'. <sep> Q: What did the Joker's detonators actually target? A: we will never know as neither boat used their detonator <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Were the detonators for their own boat of the other boat?
Yes

CONTEXT: I am surprised no one has suggested a bullet proof vest as the explanation. The first shot, hitting Bond in the shoulder, is above the location of any kevlar plates. This shot leaves an entry wound and shrapnel. The second shot, that knocks Bond off the train, makes impact around his ribs on his right side. If Bond did have a bullet proof vest on, this area is likely to be covered. The impact from the bullet is transferred through the kevlar plate/s onto a larger area of Bonds body. Rather than penetrating his ribcage, and leaving an entry wound, the vest stops the bullet. Stopping the bullet before it enters his body imparts a lot more force onto Bond, which explains him being thrown off the train. It also explains the 4 broken ribs and minor organ damage. Bullet wounds are typically puncture wounds, deep and localised. Without a vest, Bond would have suffered much more serious organ damage as the bullet tears through him. Bullet proof vests typically leave blunt trauma injuries, affecting larger areas, and are not likely to leave scarring. One direct bullet wound is not likely to break 3 ribs, however the impact through a kevlar plate definitely is. <sep> Q: in Skyfall opening scene on train, does Bond fake getting shot?
Yes