I think "Alice in Wonderland" works, but with "Disney", the actual outlines are simply copied and that's really a no-no for that style, since the marks made with what appears to be a brush or marker are peculiar to the direction and pressure the strokes were written. I think "walkman" worked well, as did the japanese example. Why? because both styles are not really specific to a script, and are playful in themselves. Some of the examples aren't as nice.

I had seen something like this earlier. Some worked, some didn't.
http://www.designer-daily.com/hebrew-translations-of-popular-logos-6798

And this also came up, with the coke logo:
http://www.roundpeg.biz/2010/05/great-logos-transcend-language/

Bear in mind, although I do know a little Hebrew, I'm not native and I'm not fluent.

Some, like the Alice in Wonderland, are transliterations; some, like Walkman and the beer label, are translations - the label includes a translation of 'Brewery" into Hebrew.
The Japanese one looks good, but I have no idea whether it's a transliteration or a translation.

Some appear to be stylistic interpretations which I personally find unreadable.

So whether they're quality products depends on what the goals were!

- Herb

I'd assume the purpose of any typographic exercise like this is to generate readable well-crafted forms/proportions, with the challenge and limitation of maintaining the original's stylistic approach.

But the style of the original can never be fully reconciled with the needs of the other script, so it becomes a complex balance of multiple sensitivities.

From Hebrew's sister script (plus a couple of others):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/48413419@N00/sets/72157627127732939/

hhp

I would argue that some of those styles are unnatural to both scripts and therefore not latinization. Or, do occur in both scripts.