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: She doesn't want to torture Sherlock, she wants to play with him. Specifically, she wants him to play with her. At least, that's what the childhood version of herself wants and it manifests in modern day as the torturous puzzling she sets up for Sherlock. Eurus lacks human emotion and, thus, doesn't see what she does as torturing her brother. <sep> Q: What is Eurus's motive in the final problem A: She doesn't want to torture Sherlock, she wants to play with him. Specifically, she wants him to play with her <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Were they friends as children?
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: Yes. He's supposed to be the same character. The timeline of the story arc is all over the place now but Spectre could be regarded as a prequel to the series before Daniel Craig. Some say a reboot but apparently its all supposed to be the same story. This falls apart because of Judi Denchs M, Bond's previous encounters with Spectre and Blofeld etc though. <sep> Q: Is Franz Oberhauser related to the original Blofeld? A: He's supposed to be the same character Q: what is the role? is anything curious thing is there? A: The timeline of the story arc is all over the place now but Spectre could be regarded as a prequel to the series before Daniel Craig Q: oh! then what about the main theme of his movie? A: Some say a reboot but apparently its all supposed to be the same story. This falls apart because of Judi Denchs M, Bond's previous encounters with Spectre and Blofeld etc though Q: oh! then what about the end of the story? A: This falls apart because of Judi Denchs M, Bond's previous encounters with Spectre and Blofeld etc though <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: do you personally know about bond?
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: CONTEXT: It may be the case that the demon is cunning and wanted to make a doubt in the mind of Karras, already having a lack of faith in demons and ghosts. As we have seen that demon plays with Karras' emotions related to his mother too. The demon reads on mind and emotions so it's not possible that he got fooled by tap water at all. <sep> Q: Why does the demon that possesses Regan react to the "fake" holy water? A: The demon reads on mind and emotions so it's not possible that he got fooled by tap water at all Q: So why did he do it? A: It may be the case that the demon is cunning and wanted to make a doubt in the mind of Karras, already having a lack of faith in demons and ghosts <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How long did the demon possess regan?
[EX A]:
No