How much control/influence do you think a group of power individuals, whose country sun rises in the east, and who has a large hold in Disney's pocket. Can demand the company to rethink their company's decision making whether it be filming, marketing, casting, etc?
Can you clarify what exactly you mean by that question? Are you asking if it's possible for the board of directors and/or shareholders for Disney can get them to rethink Disney's decision making for whatever it's doing?
Well, I generally don't hold to favorites, but if I must choose... I'd probably go with either the Richard Purdum draft, or the Cox draft, mostly because thematically, both versions were pretty close to the original story by Villevneue/Beaumont. Plus, in those versions, at least Belle had an actual excuse for putting up with the village life instead of leaving, not to mention actually HAD foils that represented the moral of the tale well (Belle's Sisters and Aunt Marguerite actually embodied inner ugliness, contrasted with the Bimbettes, who if you ask me looked like they not only blew Belle's outer beauty out of the water, but from what little we saw of them, they looked like they came closer to having actual inner beauty than Belle did). Quite frankly, Beauty and the Beast was one of those stories that didn't need as extensive of a rewrite that it got. At least with The Little Mermaid, the ending being changed was kind of necessary since it wasn't really child friendly (it would be like showing your four year old the scene where Senator Kinsey melts in the X-Men movie), there was nothing warranting that kind of rewrite that you'd expect from, say, The Jungle Book (doesn't help either that Linda Woolverton and Don Hahn outright boasted that they radically rewrote the tale to push a social agenda on the masses).
I am sorry for the edit on Alex's page. But, him being the son of Urchin and Gabriella is just too speculative, and his resemblance to the young man is simply a coinsidence, as if the young man is actually a transformed mermaid. That's why I edited the page in the first place.
I wish you wouldn't make such comparisons when someone is talking fan-fiction or ideas. You didn't comment about my idea for the third Anthology film, you were commenting about the Empire in comparison with unsettling topics in the real world. You didn't make any compliment about my idea, or suggest an even better one. This is Disney Wiki. Please in future consider what you are going to say. It's what got you into trouble several times before.
If you reply, do it without writing a long sentence explaining why you say what you say. A simple "I understand and I will try" will do.
Well, if I must be honest, it's because of how she depicted men in Maleficent, where they were evil, foolish, or useless, and similar depictions of men in Beauty and the Beast (heck, Beast ended up nearly being killed due to his being unwilling to defend his servants or even himself unless Belle was physically present). Not to mention she cut out Belle baking a cake for her dad in the latter film simply because she felt, and I quote, "a liberated woman wouldn't know how to bake a cake." It also doesn't help either that she largely treated marriage as an institution in BATB as a woman's nightmare, and depicted the only women in the film who had ANY positive views of marriage, the triplets, as being dumb blonde bimbos. Oh, and she also denounced Belle's predecessors, including Ariel, as basically being tarts who only had love and marriage as their goals, and only waited for their prince to come before they could do anything. She also made it VERY clear she was influenced largely by the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s, and intended to push that agenda in BOTH films.
Sorry to bother you again, since you seems to know a lot about Disney story and his downfall, I wanted to ask you this: I remember that there was a big name at Pixar back before Toy Story was made that wanted to shut down the 2D animation department and was stopped before he could. What was his name?