Yes and no. I loved that Natalie played an intelligent Anne Boleyn, an Anne with magnetism, wit charm, passion and a hot temper, but I disliked the fact that Hirst still played on some of the myths associated with Anne and her family, e.g. the poisoning of Bishop Fisher and his household. In an interview, Natalie Dormer told author Susan Bordo that she was not at all happy with the representation of Anne in Season 1:-
"I lost so many hours of sleep, and actually shed tears during my portrayal of her, trying to inject historical truth into the script, trying to do right by this woman that I had read so much about. It was a constant struggle, because the original script had that tendency to polarize women into saint and whore. It wasn’t deliberate, but it was there. I tried to fight that wherever I could, and because Michael Hirst and I were friends, and he had respect for my knowledge of history, I did manage to accomplish a bit. It was both inspiring and depressing when I got letters from young women, saying that it was so fascinating to watch me play a two-dimensional characterization of such a strong, powerful, clever and yet beautiful woman. The fact that it was so unusual for them to have an inspiring portrait of a spirited, strong, young woman--that's devastating to me. But young women, it seems, picked up on my efforts, and that is a massive complement. And says a lot about the intelligence of that audience. Young girls struggling to find their identity, find their place, in this supposedly post-feminist era understood what I was doing." Susan Bordo, The Creation of Anne Boleyn, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, forthcoming 2012
How wonderful that Natalie fought for Anne to be represented correctly and that she took the time to research who the real Anne Boleyn was.