The previous Anjana really looked and felt like Hanuman's mother, probably due to her featuring so prominently in the Baal-Hanuman episodes before Sundarkand. The new one - had Hanuman been married, she'd have looked more like his wife than like his mother.
One more thing that struck me, even by this storyline. If Kashi-naresh, after being told by Narad how out of ideas he was of saving him, was willing to resign himself to death by Rama, why does he refuse Anjana's pleas to free her of her vow? Once one sees that he's majorly inconveniencing his protector, isn't it his dharm to free him (or her, especially a her) of such a burden? Why does he force her to shelter him, instead of bravely accepting death from Rama like he originally resolved to? In the process, test Rama back - if Rama puts to death someone who's taken refuge in him, it would degrade his name, so let Rama take that decision.
The other thing I hate about this story - Kashi-naresh (or even Raja Shakuntan in the original source, whatever it was) was a kshatriya, and it was always kshatriya dharma to protect others, not seek the protection of others, particularly Brahmans and women. Note that in this case, my sympathies are w/ Kashi-naresh - endangering him to save Rama from the consequences of exiling Sita was unconscionable, regardless of whether one agrees w/ Rama's decision or not. Here however, you have a kshatriya ruler behaving like a complete wuss, first approaching various rishis, and then approaching a woman, trying to get her to separate her son from his sworn loyalties. I appreciate that everyone values his own life, but given what the kshatriya code of conduct was, the way this ruler behaved was unbelievably cowardly.