Both films and works of literature (as well as all other art forms) are often interpreted in light of the social, economic, and political state surrounding their production and release. A 2007 New York Times article discusses one such controversy sparked by Zack Snyder's production of 300. After reading the article, do you believe that the film should be understood in light of the US's relations with the Middle East at the time of the film's release.
It is indeed difficult to ignore the parallels between the film and then current events. Five years after 9/11, there was seemingly no end in sight to US occupations in the Middle East.
Many Americans believed that American freedoms were at stake. Unified by pride and patriotism, we sent our soldiers to fight a an inhuman enemy (terror). Similarly, the Spartans face Xerxes, the god-king, whose army is certainly portrayed in the film as a terrorist force, striking fear and threatening a democratic state with slavery or destruction. Like the Spartans, "Freedom!" was our cry as we marched off to a state of undeclared war.
Should such parallels be ignored? Are there dangers to entertaining such analyses? Are there dangers to disregarding them?