This is a really interesting question...I have often tried to work out why it might be a problem to use a name from another culture etc.
I suppose the risk is of being/sounding pretentious, but I'm not sure how you would quantify that.
one of my kids has an old fashioned, unusual name which I used partly because it was unusual these days, and I didn't want him to have a 'usual' name, which probably does make me pretentious...the other one has a name you only hear much in the older generations but it is very common. This too is probably a bit pretentious.
I agree about the origins of a name being important, to an extent, and the associations you might have with it - therefore naming a child after someone in a film, or a book, or a family member or someone IRL you have always admired is something I approve of. It makes you feel like the name is 'theirs' and increases your sense that they belong to you and you alone, and that they are marked out by having this name. It puts your baby on a pedestal, for you and perhaps your family, which is how it should be.
I think that sense of belonging is really vital. The idea that your baby is unique and special. not just one of many other babies born in the same area at the same time. But other people might put their child on that same pedestal by using a very popular name.
It depends on your values and what you want to see in your baby which is why naming a child is such a random thing and so variable with tastes and ideals.
I saw Ds's name as a sort of spidery thing...it was the solidity of the 'old' name, but there were roots, like a spider's legs, stretching out in all directions tying it to family and friends and teachers I loved and actors I loved...it wasn't just 'him' in isolation. It was what became, in my mind, a Good Name. So I gave it to him.
I would have struggled to just pick something out of a name book without any real connection to anything.