Claire-Louise said:

I watched the BBC version after reading the book and watching the movie with Natalie Portman, so i didn't have very high expectations when it came to historical accuracy, but I still ended up turning it off about three quarters of the way through as it wasn't even entertaining. What really annoyed me was the fact that Anne never seemed to have a change of dress-even when she was Queen! She seemed to wear the same plain gown throughout, whereas her ladies in waiting had much more courtly gowns adorned with pearls.

When Henry was sending her gifts and trying to please her, all I could think was- 'Henry, please buy her some material for a new gown!'

If they were going to make something which wasn't historically accurate, faithful to the book and had a poor storyline, the least they could have done was provide the lead actress with a decent costume.

I viewed “The Other Boleyn Girl” (2008 film release) and I had several complaints about it.  I agree, the film appeared to have a rock-bottom costume budget.  This was confusing since, after all, the film is supposed to cover a solid decade or so of events. 

Another issue I had was the lack of chemistry among the principles.  Scarlett Johannson and Natalie Portman don't really look like sisters.  I adore Eric Bana but neither SJ nor NP really came across as a convincing, attractive partner for him.  This didn't bother me so much in SJ/Mary's case, but I consider strong chemistry/physical attraction between Henry and Anne vital in any portrayal of their relationship.

Ironically, Ana Torrent (Katherine of Aragon) seemed more compatible with Bana than either of the two Boleyn actresses. 

Also, the portrayal of Henry VIII raping Anne Boleyn was a complete turn-off.   It isn't that I consider Henry VIII incapable of rape, but I find it hard to believe he would rape Anne and still take her as his wife and queen.