Disney/Tim Burton Alice relationship

BUR #45588 has been rejected.

create implication alice_in_wonderland_(tim_burton) -> alice_in_wonderland_(disney)

I've reading through some threads discussing how to go about tagging characters and copyrights related to Alice in Wonderland, though most are focused on separating the different versions into their own tags or creating a general tag for all Alice-type characters (which is a conversation I'll probably chime in on later when I think more on it). I didn't see any discussions on the specific relationship between the animated Disney film and Tim Burton's adaptation of it, though. I think since Tim Burton's Alice is a direct adaptation (sequel?) of Disney's film, it should imply it like other adaptations usually do.
Also, I didn't include them in the BUR because I want to see other people's thoughts on it first, but should the versions of the characters from Tim Burton's Alice imply the Disney versions as well? Something like

imply alice_kingsleigh -> alice_(disney)
imply tarrant_hightopp -> mad_hatter_(disney)

since those designs are also directly based on Disney's version.

Context for those not super familiar with the Tim Burton version: It's a sort-of time-skip sequel to Alice In Wonderland (Disney) where Alice returns to Wonderland (or "Underland", as that's its real name in the film) and realizes it's much darker of a world than she remembered from her childhood. The original animated movie is kind of implied to be a version of her past filtered through her childhood mind erasing the creepier aspects of Underland.

I would say it's more a sequel to the generic concept of Alice in Wonderland than specifically the Disney version there's nothing in it that actually harkens back to the 50s film in particular and not the novel. The flashbacks in the movie are still done with the Burton designs not the Disney designs, and it's so aesthetically divorced from 55 the only reason I'd group them is to put all of Disney's takes on the concept under one tag, but I think they should be seperate.

I just don't think people looking for Alice are going to be super thrilled finding results for Alice Kingsleigh, and same for most of the other Burton incarnations. They're just not the same in terms of aesthetics so there's no real benefit to merging them imho.

Yeah, the Tim Burton movie is so much its own thing, I'd probably be irritated to see it in a search for the Disney one.

pipirupirupirupipirupi said:

BUR #45588 has been rejected.

create implication alice_in_wonderland_(tim_burton) -> alice_in_wonderland_(disney)

I've reading through some threads discussing how to go about tagging characters and copyrights related to Alice in Wonderland, though most are focused on separating the different versions into their own tags or creating a general tag for all Alice-type characters (which is a conversation I'll probably chime in on later when I think more on it). I didn't see any discussions on the specific relationship between the animated Disney film and Tim Burton's adaptation of it, though. I think since Tim Burton's Alice is a direct adaptation (sequel?) of Disney's film, it should imply it like other adaptations usually do.
Also, I didn't include them in the BUR because I want to see other people's thoughts on it first, but should the versions of the characters from Tim Burton's Alice imply the Disney versions as well? Something like

imply alice_kingsleigh -> alice_(disney)
imply tarrant_hightopp -> mad_hatter_(disney)

since those designs are also directly based on Disney's version.

As someone who has seen everything Alice, Tim Burton's Alice isn't even considered a sequel to the Disney film, if anything, I think it's Burton's of an older Alice (think American Mcgee's Alice) so it's more a sequel to the novel/book series if anything, with only nods to the Disney classic

TheGamingRodent said:

As someone who has seen everything Alice, Tim Burton's Alice isn't even considered a sequel to the Disney film, if anything, I think it's Burton's of an older Alice (think American Mcgee's Alice) so it's more a sequel to the novel/book series if anything, with only nods to the Disney classic

Yeah, I guess I can see that as well. I always thought of it as a companion to the Disney film since it was also made by Disney (and also because it combines the Red Queen and the Queen of Hearts like Disney did, which is my biggest Alice pet peeve haha), but I will admit the story beats are more based on the novel.

The bulk update request #45588 (forum #376476) has been rejected by @pipirupirupirupipirupi.