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:`.

Example Input: CONTEXT: It's in Parry's mind. At the start of the scene, people in Grand Central Station are just walking, making noise, chaotic. Parry is looking for Lydia, whom he is in love with. When Parry sees Lydia, classical music starts, and the chaotic crowd is now in sync (in Parry's mind). They begin waltzing around him. Parry has a smile on his face. He follows Lydia through the sweetly dancing couples, all the way across Grand Central Station, and the universe is in harmony, for him. When he finally loses sight of Lydia on the other side, the couples go back to being a crowd, and the music stops and is replaced with the dissonant noises of the throng. Here is the scene: EDIT I also found an interview with director Terry Gilliam (below) regarding that particular scene. In the video, at 2:10, he says, "I just love the idea of Perry being so in love that, you know, the world changes to whatever dreams he has."  <sep>  Q: Why people were dancing at the subway? A: When Parry sees Lydia, classical music starts, and the chaotic crowd is now in sync (in Parry's mind). They begin waltzing around him  Q: What makes the crowd so chaotic? A: At the start of the scene, people in Grand Central Station are just walking, making noise, chaotic  Q: Is there anything you can tell me about the Subway the movie was filmed in? A: Grand Central Station  Q: How many people were involved in the dance scene at the subway? A:   <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Who directed the movie?
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: CONTEXT: This is a highly opinionated question because people will feel different about what is considered "end of origin story". I argue the whole movie is an origin story. It starts in the beginning of him being a surgeon, loosing his ability to operate, searching for solutions, the whole "superhero in training montage", climax where he finds out his true purpose and powers and ending in him being what is considered to be The Doctor Strange everybody knows. There is no cut in the movie where you could say: "Okay, NOW origin is over" because (again, highly opinionated), only at the end of the movie is the character fully developed and whole. Anything in between is just a half truth.  <sep>  Q: How much of Doctor Strange is origin story? A: the whole movie is an origin story  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Do we see Doctor Strange go to another country?
Example Output: Yes

Example Input: 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
Example Output:
Yes

