Places that DON’T click for you

So you weren’t thrilled. As it was part of a larger trip maybe you were tired. The brain can get fatigued just like any other part of the body.

C’est la vie. It happens. Nothing to be fretful about.

Even with the wonderful 7 day RS Tour I took other than getting to see David by ourselves before the hordes were let in, Florence did nothing for me.

Was I happy I went? Yes. Would I visit again? No.

Life goes on.

Yep been to that same place you are talking about; some look better in pictures and get hype from word of mouth but when you get there, meh.

Lots of places I thought I’d enjoy, but really didn’t while others, I was unsure how I’d like them, turned out to be outstanding. Happens all the time. Some of the best unexpected places are places that we’ve come across that were not on the original itinerary. Sometimes it’s possible we set our expectations so high for a place that there’s no way that place could ever meet them.

Yes! Normally I love every place I travel to. And I joke that, after every trip, I want to live in that place.

But like you, I traveled to one city that just wasn't for me. Don't get me wrong.... I'm so glad I went there. I had really wonderful experiences there... sightseeing, views, activities. I enjoyed some really notable moments that make me smile.

It's just not the town for me.

Interestingly, I'm going back for a few side trips and things I didn't have time for on the first visit. So I appreciate it in very many ways. But we didn't "click" as you said.

Cinque Terre and Rue Cler were those places for me.

Both times, I was anticipating "magic", and what I got instead was "nice, but really crowded".

I’m just back from a trip and while I had a great time there was one place that I thought I’d love but...didn’t. It was fine, I didn’t hate it but it just wasn’t for me. I’d still recommend other people with an interest in what this place has to offer should go. There was no bad experience or something “wrong” with it. I didn’t have false expectations. It’s just the place and I didn’t click.

That is totally normal! In fact, I am surprised that you would be surprised about this. Doesn't that happen with books or movies as well? Everyone is raving about a certain item, yet for you it's just "meh."

When we went to Hawaii for the first time, we visited all four of the main islands. Based on what I'd heard about ahead of time, I expected to like Kauai best, but it turned out I liked it least - and by a long shot.

But isn't that part of why we all travel? To see things and experience things for ourselves and come to our own judgments? If everything turned out just the way you expected, wouldn't travel be kind of boring?

I wouldn't over think it. There's lots of room between loving (a person, place, or thing) and hating. Feeling "meh" about something fits right in between. Seems perfectly logical to me. And like many things in life, that feeling may not remain static over time. There's no law that says you have to fall in love with every place you visit.

You may be taking a popular travel writer as gospel

I haven't found any place I've traveled to totally uninteresting, nor felt unmotivated to go out every day and explore it. But I think it's very worthwhile to travel to all kinds of places just to learn about yourself and challenge yourself. I'm a big Anthony Bourdain fan and he's very much of the spirit of getting out of your comfort zone. By inference, those places won't immediately "click" but they'll expand your world and make you think. I prefer that over immediately falling in love with a place. There are places which I didn't interpret as love at the time I saw them but which are totally seared in my memory (in a good way or a really complex way - none of them were in Europe). Sometimes it's worth stepping back a bit and re-evaluating (and if there's no change, that's fine too).

Sure it happens. There was one USA city I disliked so much, I spent most of the trip at the hotel bar. There’s a city in the Caribbean that I wouldn’t go back to if you paid me.

It’s happened to me in Europe as well, sometimes it’s travel fatigue, maybe the weather is awful, or I’ve got crowd fatigue. Or, somehow, the city just seems better on YouTube or a travel book than in real life. I’d much rather arrange a last minute day trip and eat McDonald’s for a few meals to balance out the budget when I get a place like that.

Hubby and I spent a few days in London after a RS Turkey tour. I love visiting London and he had never been. On our last day, while on a bus, he said “ what is it about London that you like so much?” It was obvious in the way he said it that London is not for him!

Looking at your previous posts, I think you are referring to Vienna or Salzburg as you stated you’d be there in early June? Just curious as I’m interested.

I can't think of any places that I have visited in Europe that totally did not click for me. There were a few that I was a bit lukewarm on I guess. Sometimes it's a matter of your attitude, there are always highs and lows in terms of mood and energy level for me and bad weather does not help. Also if you happen to be in a place when there is something special going on, the crowds can hamper enjoyment. A quick visit to a big city is not a great recipe for enjoyment, as the ratio or fun to logistical hassles is out of balance. Especially on a first visit. That said, not every big city is worth a five night visit. Sometimes it's good to give a city a second chance, but it's up to every individual to make that choice. If you know the ropes things get a lot more enjoyable, one reason I like to return to places.

This was a bigger version of our ABC experience... Another Beautiful Church/Castle. Another Fantastic Museum! Totally normal.... This is why we now aim for “Second Rate Cities” where our visiting experiences are not totally preprogrammed by multiple tour guidebook explanations. Nördlingen perhaps instead of Rothenburg.

I am going to go ahead and name the cities. Paris and Munich. They are nice, I enjoyed seeing things there and walking around, but darn if I can figure out why people rave about them and it will be ok if I don't return to either one of them. I'd go of course, if a friend or my husband wanted to go but frankly would rather spend my money and time seeing other places. They pushed zero excitement buttons with me. Maybe I enjoy the not so popular cities more? Milan, Brussels, Cologne, Frankfurt are all way more appealing to me.

Of all the places visited on 24 trips in Europe in the course of 48 years, the place that singularly stands out in turning me off is Lyon, went there in 1997, didn't like it, did nothing for me.

In 1999 went back again to Lyon, still didn't like the place. Now after 20 years would I go back...maybe , depends. Lyon falls into the "actively dislike" category.

I have been to capitals/big cities Paris, Berlin, London, Vienna, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Düsseldorf, and small

and medium places...Lüneburg, Soest/Westf, Meaux, Cambrai, Colmar, Marburg, Compiegne, Reims, Albert/Somme, Obernai,

Wiener Neustadt, Deutsch-Wagram, Graz, Leoben, Malbork, etc ,etc ...regardless of physical size or population size, they ranged from a mere OK to fantastic.

Fred - what was it about Lyon you didn't like? I'm headed there in a few weeks. And actually the more planning I've done the less enthused I am about it, I ended up reducing my time there from 4 to 3 nights (and am planning two day trips).

As to the original question - I find most of the time if I am disappointed in a place (which only happens to me about 5% of the time - and I'm about to embark on trip #33) it is either the weather was bad or I had very high expectations which the place didn't live up to. Many times I've gone back and ended up loving it. My first time in Rome it was really hot (and I usually travel in summer and don't mind the heat, but this was a bad heat wave) and I had my kids with me. Really didn't like it. Now I've been back 6 more times and it's one of my favorite cities anywhere. Most of the time it's rain, I am very sun dependent so when it's raining I'm rarely happy anywhere.

I can think of a few for me.

Prague. Too busy (and we were there in 2004, I can't imagine now), and unable to service the crowds. Factor in hoards of English stag do groups, there wasn't much "magic" to experience.

Paris. Possibly a result of a very, very cold week in February. I liked it, but I don't long to return. In fact we've been to France twice since that Paris week and both times bypassed Paris entirely. I love France outside of Paris.

Ireland--sort of. Had a ball, really liked it, but for some reason its not a place I see myself returning to anytime soon. I'd rate it better than "meh", that's for sure, but with our budget and time off constraints, I can't foresee a 2nd visit.

And its all just as well, because there are so many places I do want to return to, and so many more left to experience for the first time!

We did two back to back tours ( done this in past years, with ease). I was looking for forward to my trips but when we got to the second tour. Husband got ill and I was horrible allergies from the trees . I was miserable and did not thoroughly enjoy my tour. We arrived three days before tour started, husband got better but I felt like crap. Thinking this had jaded my opinion of this tour. Nothing against RS, just bad timing and events on this years trips.

Have not done my trip report nor evaluation cause I don’t know what to say! Lol

Brussels-didn't have the kind of sights I enjoy.
Venice-we went in August of 1985 and have no intention or desire to go back. The canals smelled like a sewer and despite not even using tap water to brush my teeth, I got bad stomach cramps that ruined the beautiful train trip through Switzerland.

Edited: the European city I click with most is Florence. The ambience reminds me of my #1 favorite city, Charleston.

For me it is Gdansk, just could not warm up to it, both figuratively and literally, a nasty cold wind from the Baltic there.

It was Galway for me.....

I kinda get castled, museumed, and chapeled out after awhile. I know, it's my problem.

The Louvre didn't do much for me because by golly it was super crowded. There were tour groups that would bowl you over if you didn't get out of the way. It's hard to enjoy a painting if you're getting jostled around as people took selfies and so forth.

We got on a Seine cruise in a small group and shared a bottle (or three or four) of wine, and that was much better! We were thankful to not be jammed shoulder-to-shoulder on some of the other cruises we saw. That did not look like fun at all.

Excellent topic Mira.

Prior to your post I was thinking about how to bring this topic forward without offending those on the forum who are madly in love with a particular city and you've managed to find a way.

From our trip last Fall there was one major popular city that felt the same as you describe. I didn't dislike it, but it just didn't click with me. There was nothing overtly wrong with it, in fact we had some great meals, weather was good, accommodation was good, and really enjoyed a few other select activities, but on balance I have no interest in returning.

In my case, I think I relied too heavily on others passion and enthusiasm for this city and what I experienced didn't live up to that. If it's convenient on future trips I would consider giving it another go just to see if I feel different on the second go around.

For me it was Munich in early September and pretty much all of Germany, except 3 nights on the Rhine. Didn’t hate it but didn’t have the WoW feelings experienced in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy. Not sure why. Maybe it was that we booked the trip just a couple months before travel due to finding an incredible airfare from our home city. I do love the planning and anticipation. Did love the Rhine though.

I've experienced this a couple of times. I love Italy and will happily return, but I was "meh" on both Florence and Milan. The art in Florence is amazing, but city itself ''meh". I felt the same way about Barcelona and Madrid. Too overcrowded. Still I'm glad I went and the experiences have helped me hone my itinerary. Oh, and not fan o Dijon either.

Metz and its surroundungs, though I was too young at the time to expect anything better.

The lake district of northern Italy and Strasbourg were a mild disappointment, as were some places I revisited many years later. Bamberg comes to mind.

There are quite a few places that I wasn't sorry I went to but that I felt were "meh." A few of them left me wondering what all the hype was about. Those that come to mind are Padua, Hallstatt, Nice, Stonehenge, and recently in Portugal, Nazare and and, to a lesser extent, Obidos. In the U.S., the popularity of Los Angeles astounds me.

As for "didn't click" experiences - honestly Florence and Rome!! I went back to both for the sights and gradually came to really enjoy being in both, though my love of Florence came much more easily. Lastly, there is one country that is a very popular destination for many, but that "I didn't click with." I went there once because one of my favorite lecturers was leading a week-long tour and a good friend was working in a major city. The second time was for a seasonal event. I can't explain it, nothing negative happened, the most of the sights were interesting, some were outstanding, the people were pleasant and courteous, just no "click."

@ isabel...My comments on Lyon are pretty subjective and they are 20 years old. I was with others at the time, the Mrs, her brother, etc, didn't get good vibes about the place, people -wise, especially walking the center area. Both times I was there in the summer, took the TGV Paris to Lyon

Viewing the Rhone river was interesting. You can get some good views of the city and landscape. Your experiences in Lyon might be totally different from what I encountered, ie, more positive.

When I go to a movie, it's not unusual that something I thought I'd really enjoy wasn't great - while something I wasn't thrilled about seeing exceeded my expectations.

The most recent high expectation spot for me, that really disappointed, was Dingle. I had been around the Ring of Kerry on a previous trip but didn't see Dingle or Dingle peninsula so I made a point to see it in May. I found the town to be 100 percent tourist trap (and this is May, presumably before the tourist rush). By tourist trap I mean every shop was oriented for tourist trade, every pub had paid performers (not amateurs doing a trad session), and every bar/pub patron was a tourist.

The sights on the peninsula were major disappointments, most sights are barely worth seeing and certainly not worth paying for. I was tempted to add up the total cost to see Rick's recommended stops on the Slea Head route - I'd guess something around 30 or 40 euros for a series of marginal and non-sight stops.

The bright spots were the two oratories (both free if you don't stop at the Galarus tourist station). I spent one night on the Ring of Kerry. I thought the sights were superior and much less touristy - because most people drive the circle without stopping at many sights or staying the night.

For me on this trip it is Greece period. We have been to Athens and Nafplio. We went to Micenae - blew me away. But Athens - I cannot think of a city I dislike more. I was pick-pocketed, and that was my own fault. But it is a huge, ugly, unplanned, dirty, place with a lot of Extremely shady characters at the metro. We won't go back to Greece.

@ Carlos....I can understand that the factor of weather could really diminish one's interest and enjoyment of a city, ie being defeated by the weather, so to say. I've been to Gdansk only once, spent 4 nights in a Pension located in the Old Town. That was in July 2003...no cold Baltic wind then but it did rain during our stay.

Going there from Berlin Zoo, transferring twice, I was thrilled to arrive ca. 17:00 or so after a train ride of ca. 9.5 hours; subjectively, it seemed to me then I was going far off, even it's only to the mouths of the Vistula, couldn't believe I was there in the former Danzig, the former province capital and all that.

Holyhead Wales is an awful place--only reason to go there is to catch a ferry to Ireland.

This is all very interesting!

The point about challenging yourself is interesting. I tend to like places that others consider a bit challenging (Rome, Athens, Mexico City, almost all of Sicily...). I wasn't challenged by this place in any normal way (nothing was harder or more unfamiliar than I tend to be used to, the opposite in some ways) - but that is its own challenge. I feel like if I copied Anthony Bourdain and went way, way off the beaten path I may end up loving or hating the place, but one thing I wouldn't be was unmotivated to explore it. So exploring and finding the interesting even when less-than-thrilled is a good thing to work on.

When someone lists one of "your" places as one that doesn't click for them it is so tempting to argue with them. To assume they missed this or did that wrong. I saw this a bit with Paris. Paris is not the place in my OP, I like Paris, I just don't love it. I tell that to my Paris-obsessed friend and I get all sorts of "but did you go to this area and do that?". And I love Rome and have to make myself not do the same thing to people who don't like that city. But once you are a reasonably informed traveler it might just come down to personality/style/preference. Maybe it's like with people...sometimes you click, sometimes you don't. Sometimes there's a reason but sometimes there's not, it's just the way it is.

Oh - weather can definitely do it if you are doing things that need good wether. But I had terrible weather one day in Iceland and still loved it - but you expect bad weather in Iceland and go prepared. If I had bad weather on Hydra, that would have ruined it.

Yes, I'm overthinking. That's pretty much what I do all day every day LOL!

I think the analogy of movies is a good one. We've all had movies that others loved or liked taht we didn't; we've all seen movies where we were the only one that seemed to respond well to it.

And you also bring up a good point. There are places we love and places we don't like at all (or, maybe, even hate). But then there are places that are "just OK." We don't hate them; we don't regret going; we just don't get the love that others feel for them. And that's OK too. As my parents used to say, "that's why there's chocolate and vanilla."

I’m our trip planner - somewhat of an obsession, putting numerous hours, weekends, and now that I’m retired even more hours into our yearly trip to Europe. Thinking back through our last five years of trips, I’m sure there’s a direct correlation between how many hours I’ve researched a specific town on-line and how much I ended up enjoying being there. While I’m researching, I’m picturing us being there, I learn about the sites and usually ensure a few locations have some sort of activity, such as a cooking class that we always enjoy. I mention this because my husband volunteered one year to do the research for Bologna. When we arrived there, he didn’t have any specific ideas and neither one of us enjoyed that city.

We love cities such as Paris, Vienna, etc. but I know that our most memorable experiences have been with the smaller town ambiance and an itinerary combination of city/beach or mountains. So, I wouldn’t plan solely a Venice, Florence, Rome trip for us, for instance.

I agree with you - some towns just click. When I was researching our first trip to Spain, the little village of Frigiliana just seemed like it would be the perfect special location to relax and explore towards the end of our trip. I would pull up photos on-line while I was on a lunch break at work and picture us there! I even dreamed about it! When we were finally there, it was everything I had hoped.

Lastly, every town that we visited to coincide with a festival or concert has always been a favorite. Being around more locals, enjoying an activity together always makes for a fun day!

I find I often like places more that I haven’t overly planned for. No real expectations. Also, I’m lucky that my husband is very spontaneous and often encourages me to do something I wouldn’t do on my own. I’ll never forget jumping on a public bus in Beijing about 20 years ago. Had no idea where we went, but saw a typical neighborhood and then caught the same numbered bus to go back. Being travel fatigued also makes a hugh difference. I hated Madrid the first time we went, but that was at the end of a 4 week trip. I really wasn’t looking forward to returning this spring to visit a cousin. But I was pleasantly surprised when I enjoyed being there this time.

My clearest memory of Rome was being drenched in sweat while carrying my daughter around on my shoulders. We visited the usual sites and had a good time, but I'm not sure "fun" is a good description of our visit. It was daggone hot!

I made a mental note about the wisdom of visiting Rome in August.

Yep, I have been to Paris three times for a total of about two weeks. I am glad I went, I did the main things, I love Art so I accomplished a couple bucket list items among other things...but I have never been enthralled with the experience or longed to go back. Paris just hits me as a big city, lots of tourists, Food is "meh" bit like supper with the old folks. Yeah, the cheese is nice, bread good, they now have some fairly decent beer, but Paris is far from my first choice of having to spend some time.

It’s Milan for me. I generally just use it as a place to fly into or out of and have no desire to spend any time at all there!

Beaches, for me.

I am just not the relax-on-the-beach type! Whether it's beaches in Europe or anywhere else in the world - Hawaii, the Caribbean, or what have you - I simply can't enjoy a beach no matter how gorgeous and beautiful. If it's particularly scenic I can appreciate it and stand there for a few moments blown away by it's awe-inspiring beauty, but then I have to find something to do. If the goal is to put down a towel and just relax and soak up some sun as so many countless people thoroughly enjoy doing, I'll pass. When friends have been thrilled by the Med. beaches in Spain or France and wanted to spend all day enjoying them, I've had to go off on my own to explore the town and see what else I can find.

Milan didn't do much for us - it was just - I don't know - more of a 'business' city for us - though I did enjoy the Duomo. And while I did enjoy Amsterdam, I have to learn not to expect to love a place - I LOVE Venice and thought I'd feel the same about Amsterdam (canals and all that) - but I was just - OK with it. But the fact that the spring weather was pretty cool, I had some weird throat thing going on that made eating/swallowing painful and was physically ill one night, and we did day trips on 3 of our 4 days there, leaving us little time to explore Ams itself - it's a wonder I didn't hate it. But I'm going to give it another chance some year.

My husband always wants to go back to his most favorite places. That list has become two specific places now, after many many trips in Europe but he does like others enough (Paris, London, Venice) to make short stays when convenient. (We’ve been to all three of those cities over-and-over.)

I push the boundaries and insist on every trip that we go somewhere new, if only for a few days. As I tell him, we would never have found those favorites had we not gone the first time. Each additional location we add has the potential to be a favorite or a “meh”. For us, churches and museums have become “meh” overall, but still occasionally visit them, especially if weather is bad.

We only have one place we laugh about having visited and say “never again!”

I like questions like this because I enjoy reading comments from other people who have been to the same place and their opinions are completely opposite of mine. I'm going to bring up Paris and food. Just back from a visit plus a 2 week RS tour of Loire Valley to the South of France. Paris for me was disappointing. Of the big 3-Paris, London and Rome, Paris is a distant third. Everyone said you'll love Paris and you'll love the food. I didn't hate Paris, it just didn't do anything for me when comparing it to how much I loved London and Rome. And the food, horribly disappointed throughout France. No doubt it was prepared well and of fine quality, but for me it was way too bland. If I would have had a kingdom I would have given it for a bottle of hot sauce. I know I'm in the minority, most people on the tour loved it, but there were some like me that really wanted a little more zip to the food. On the positive side, I loved the rest of France and I lost 7 pounds.

I sort of feel that way about Florence, nothing bad about it, but I think I was overhyping it in my head and it didn't fully deliver for me. I enjoyed visiting it and loved the art and had the best panini of my life there, but I don't see a lot of reasons to go back anytime soon. I loved our day out in Tuscany, and if we did Tuscany again, I would stay in Siena or somewhere even smaller, maybe an agriturismo. I think maybe what happened is that I loved Rome way more than I imagined I would and after Rome, Florence just seemed 'less'. BUT, I would still recommend it if anyone goes to Italy because it is a great city and worthwhile to see for a few days. It's just not my jam.

For my wife and I, definitely Venice.

Laurel, What was your “never again” place?

For me, Paris, Barcelona and Florence are the big disappointments particularly when considering how popular they are with others.

I just don't get Las Ramblas, it's nothing more than a pedestrianised street full of shops and expensive restaurants. You can find the same in any city. I'm sure the huge crowds of people wandering up and down it are thinking the same as me and as I'm not particularly interested in Gaudi that pretty much rules out Barcelona for me, there are far, far more interesting places in Spain that I prefer to visit over Barcelona.

My visits to France haven't been my most memorable and the French evidently believe their own hype about their food. Yes, there are the classics but does every restaurant in Provence need to have Daube de Boeuf on the menu? Or all the other regional classics? I like a bit more imagination with my food and much of France is stuck in the past when it comes to food. Italy can be similar in its approach but I've eaten far more memorable Italian classics than I have French ones.

Munich has some really great museums but I am not a fan of how everyone just mobs the city center and it's a complete zoo most of the time. Hotels are expensive and last visit we wound up staying near the train station which felt very seedy. Likewise Prague with the tourist mobs in the old town, the rowdy bachelor/ette partiers and the general seediness of places offering adult entertainment of various types. I warmed up to Vienna on a second visit. There are some great sights there but the overly mobbed city center was just not my scene, plus the first visit we had bad weather and there does seem to be a dirty underbelly that is not appealing. Now I would go back for a third visit because the second one was an improvement though. Colmar did not hold that much charm for me, with its dried up canals. The big museum there is fantastic though. I was in Nice for a short time in 2003 and would give it another chance. Here too the area around the train station seemed like skid row. Plenty of big cities are fine around the train station area but not Nice in 2003. We spent most of the way in Monaco and Villefranche so I definitely think Nice deserves a second chance. Cascais, have visited briefly twice and there is a lot of charm, but the hotel we stayed at in 2008 was positively horrible with badly stained carpets and there were a lot of rowdy drunken groups. I would return on a day trip or simply stay in a better hotel. Sometimes my gut take is based upon things that are no fault of the place, so I try to be open-minded about returning to places that were lacking in some way. I don't dislike these places, just have some reseverations. Too quick a visit often prevents one from finding the appeal in a place, longer stays and return visits help me to like a place more.

I think it can change over time as well, a place that may have been magical for you once, on another trip....not so much. I have had some of those. First went to the Cinque Terra in 2000, loved it, part of the reason we decided to travel back. Even a few years later we stopped and the crowds were so pressing we started to shy away, but found a very pleasant time in some of the lesser known villages and after the day trippers. The last time, no pleasure to be found

My fear is that Amsterdam may be heading that way, A reliable stop on trips, have been maybe 5 times, would go back in a heartbeat, but after a wonderful night with locals in a great beer bar, I decided to wander through what is left of the red light district, for no other reason that it is a great area. But the crowds were so massive at 10:00 PM that there were traffic jams in some of the narrower alley's, just ruined a nice stroll.

It's interesting that one person's Xanadu is another person's pergatory.

We all have different interests and way of traveling. I've learned a lot about my likes and dislikes from travel.

I have learned:

1) Guidebooks are just guides. They are not bibles. The author's opinion is just that...their opinion. Not gospel. Just opinion. It's okay to disagree and ignore the suggestions. It's okay to do something that seems interesting to you even if it is not in the guidebook.

2) Just because others tell you you must go to XXX, if you have no interest it's okay to skip it.

3) It's your time and your money. Do what YOU want to do..

4) I have learned that I have an aversion to crowds. So I plan when and where I go depending on that. It's not always easy or possible, but I try.

5) It's okay to go back to places you really like. I do it all the time to see more. On the other hand, if a place offers no interest to you, skip it. Even if the majority love it. (See number 3).

6) We all have our own travel style. Some like to pack every minute of every day with something while others take a more leisurely trip. I am in the latter as I find it fulfilling to take it slow and at times just put my feet up.

Oh my vftravels - we're heading to both Prague and Vienna for the first time in Sept - lol. I will just change my expectations and be overly prepared for crowds - I'll imagine it really bad, then maybe it won't 'seem' so bad...I'm an early riser, so I'll have to get out early to some of the more picturesque spots.

Funny, I live in Vienna and never feel crowded. Really, only two streets have crowds of any note and I just don’t go there often. Vienna has lots of quiet corners for those willing to walk away from Kaerntnerstrasse and the Graben.

Barcelona. I did not care for it 40 years ago and did my best to approach it with new eyes and heart a couple of years ago. No soap. As the OP notes, it just didn’t “click” for me. Millions love it but I guess I’m not one of them.

Becky it is Paestum! We planned a 2 night stay there and wish we’d done a half-day only. Ruins were marvelous but nothing else there. Did find a good restaurant but also a dead rat in one street and a dead cat in another and very sullen people. It wasn’t even high season!

Emily I never felt Roma was crowded when we lived there. Even on summer evenings when we would venture the Centro Storico, it was not bad. OTOH, even in winter Via del Corso was nuts and we used back streets.

I wasn't very excited by Paris. Nothing actually wrong with it (apart from it's Metro system which is shamefully poor). But nothing especially exciting either once you've seen the Eiffel Tower. The food is generally old-fashioned too. For large cities in Europe, Rome was much more "wow" to me. So too Berlin. Outside Europe, I was unimpressed by NYC. Tall buildings, nice enough cityscape, okay for a day or two perhaps - but not great. I much preferred Washington DC, Las Vegas and, best of all, America's natural sights.

I think a large portion of the problem is in how you approach travel. I tend to dislike packaged tours, especially to places I know, because they are too tightly scheduled. Likewise cruises, which to me are a fine torture. It took me a while to realize that my pattern is part of how my father approached vacations; one year it would be back to the family farm, the next year it was someplace we'd never been before. He could, and would, go down a road just because he had not seen it before. I've come to see that I tend to prefer that myself.

I hate to backtrack; if there's more than one way to get from point A to point B I'll use at least two. Likewise, I rarely take vacations with a schedule other than the beginning and ending dates. I fail to understand the people who drive up to a spot, get out, take a picture, and then climb into the car to race to the next "must see" spot. Too many people fail to take the time to sit and enjoy the places they visit.

There are always going to be places you prefer, and the comparisons grow the more you get out. And too, at some point saturation sets in and you just want to be home. But in between, there can be those places you never warm up to. Sadly I also find I also have places I'm pretty much burnt out on. Luckily it's a big world...

For me, I would list Annecy in France and the American South, especially the southeast (and I used to live there).

Annecy in particular. Oh my gosh. Why people from the U.S. would waste their time going there when one can find similar (or better) views of medieval France and far better alpine views elsewhere mystifies me.

Neither "clicks" for me and I am puzzled by the interest in visiting either one. If I never again do so, but go to other places I find more interesting, I would be a happy man.

Okay! I will bite! We are independent travelers with four other trips to Spain. It is Barcelona's tourist vibe. It is way to easy to be an American tourist in Barcelona. We had many local experiences that are unforgettable but I hope to not to return. Our week in Catalonia, outside Barcelona, is what I will talk about.

Paestrum: I agree the ruins and museum are well worth a visit. Did you know families would pay women to mourn at a wake? The evening lights outlining the site are the reason to stay one night. We had a wonderful evening meal prepared by a local family restaurant, the young men even knew the "Mailman" who had played for the Jazz. We did walk to the tired beach. There was a lot of street noise at our hotel with an excellent host. I imagined people going to work at the local farms or was it late night drinking? Our host with help was trying to get a new washer in his garage. It was really a funny sight! By the way, there were fields of pomegranates as you walked to the train station.

Usually my underwhelmed feelings coincide on days that I am tired or the weather is bad, so I have to consider whether it is really that I didn't click with the place, or whether it was just me. Munich was one of these places, but after careful consideration, I don't think I would care if I never traveled there again. Florence was also one, but I think it was because it was crowded and rainy and I was tired, and I think in different circumstances I would like it, so I would be willing to try again.

Some places were simply OK in Europe, but the only place I did not click with is Venice.

I don't know why. The weather was nice, a couple of late evening quick rain showers and comfortable temperatures the rest of the time. No high tides. Not overly crowded. Mostly good food. I am very interested in the architecture and how these buildings were built so well so long ago and still stand. But when people stated they wanted to stay another week there, I visibly shuddered.

I think it was the hotel.

Hotel was located in one of the more densely cramped areas and it left me with a feeling of overwhelming claustrophobia. The street out front was barely wide enough for one person and if you passed anyone, one or the other had to step into a doorway so there was enough room to pass. I had the attic room with only a skylight and no other windows. The staff and amenities in the hotel were fine, I wonder how such an old place can keep itself looking so nice, but I could not stand being in the hotel. I spent most of my free time, except when I tried to sleep, in a nearby plaza a couple bridges away. Couldn't wait get away from there.

What an interesting thread, Mira! I am enjoying reading about places that don't click with others and am happy folks are feeling free to express their opinions on their travels.

I was shocked after visiting 2 countries that I had always wanted to visit and then found them "just OK". I didn't dislike them but neither really caught me. The places? Both Ireland and Scotland. I was shocked because I have genealogy ties to both and have really enjoyed the other Celtic areas of Wales, Cornwall and Brittany. I'm not sure why neither caught me - just didn't. Weather was fine, food was fine, sights were fine, history was fine.

I also felt the same way about Vienna and Munich. OK, glad I've been, no need to return kind of feeling.

What DID catch me by surprise was Paris! I had visited back in 1976 and really actively disliked it. Smelly, I didn't understand Parisians and thought they were rude, just didn't get it. On my RS 21 Best of Europe tour the first night the guide said - if you've been to Paris before and didn't like it I'll make you love it! Well, I don't know if he just planted the seed but yes, I loved it! I had also signed up for a back to back Best of Paris tour and that helped me solidify my love for this city. Dimitri's and Rolinka's love for Paris was contagious and now I can't visit enough! Food? Well, I'm vegan so I'm not looking for a food experience, just want something to fill me up.

The other city that I just love is Bath. I love the whole Georgian/Roman thing....plus imagining myself in a trashy Regency Ro-mance novel, hahaha! I've been for multiple days over maybe 4 visits and still haven't seen everything I want to see.

Shocked and pleased that I am not alone in my secret dislike of Paris!

I visited it a few times as a teenager and was so concentrated on seeing art I don't even remember the city.

Visited again for a week with my husband and teenage son (both French-speaking) and stayed in a lovely apartment next to a canal and in a very interesting neighborhood, visited parks and gardens, discovered a really neat little bakery, saw and did plenty of wonderful things. Spring break, so nice weather.

So what was the problem?

Well, I found the architecture gray and austere and dreary. The public garbage cans were all overflowing. I experienced my top two worst bathroom nightmares (one at a famous church had both garbage cans and toilets overflowing and people had used tourist maps in ways they were not intended to be used because there was no toilet paper). Thought Rue Cler was boring. Not interested in shopping or fashion or nightlife. Except for the bakery, we could not find any place to eat that we liked and we are really good at finding places to eat. We'd eaten extremely well in the Loire and Brittany and Normandy before we got to Paris.

But none of that seems like a huge big deal. Not any reason to dislike a whole city. I love London and Rome, so it's not dislike of big crowded cities. It's a mystery.

When I went to Lyon as mentioned above for the first time, it was the 9th trip in Europe, the 8th in France, but the city I found depressing just walking around in, exploring by tram or on foot was Vienna..still interesting, captivating, and all that but depressing at the same time.

That was my first impression and feelings the first time seeing it, six years later in 1977 I went to Vienna again for the second time...still depressing and morose. No other city, even those 3 visited in commie places, ie, east Berlin, Prague or Potsdam struck me initially as depressing.

It's not the weather factor...London was gray, overcast at times in 1971, so was Paris in August 1977, as was Frankfurt and Munich in that 1977 trip. Still being gray, gloomy, and overcast does not make a place immediately depressing but Vienna was with this weather and also when sunny.

That was back then. I don't find it depressing now when visiting it.

Amazed that people hated some of my favorite places like, Florence, Rome, Paris and Munich.

Well, different strokes for different folks.

Nassau comes to mind as a place I won't get off the ship to visit.

Exactly how I felt about a certain large European city which most would say they love. I was kind of bored both times I was there. Don't need to ever go again. I don't generally like the big cities. On the other hand, the little villages in Germany, Austria and Switzerland have my heart and I happily return to them over and over again.

Las Vegas is a city that I just can't stand; I've been there four times over the last 25 years for business and would gladly never step foot anywhere near that place again. I did not like Nashville on a recent trip, although after the fact I realized that we must have been there during spring break because it was absolute chaos all day everywhere you went. Frankly, it never occurred to me that it would be a spring break destination so that didn't factor into my thought process at all. And on my last trip to Montreal (perhaps the fifth time I had been there, although the first trip that was purely for pleasure) it did not click for me the way it had in the past. In Europe, I didn't find that Rothenburg ob der Tauber lived up to expectations; yes, it was pretty, but far too touristy. I didn't like Wroclaw either, it felt quite grim when I was there 15 years ago. I was on an organized tour and for some reason they had scheduled our day in Wroclaw to coincide with the one day a week that absolutely nothing was open so there was little to do. I felt "meh" about Venice, but I think that was because it was the last city of a very busy trip and I was too exhausted to fully appreciate it.

I’d looked forward to seeing Venice for more than 40 years. We approached the city wrong (too much time trying to get from A to B rather than just wandering, too much time shuffling through crowds) but the place just didn’t flip our switch. The Vivaldi concert and Alessandro’s cichetti tour were my highlights. Otherwise, nope. On the other hand, we fell in love with Florence instantly and would return in a heartbeat.

Ya never know. That’s why we go.

Reims: France's answer to Stockton, California.

Apparently, the cathedral -- the first, last and only reason to go to Reims -- was built on the site of some Roman ruins. The Romans were so unimpressed with the place that they built some baths, shrugged, and sodded off back to Italy where at least they had Caligula to keep them entertained; thus was set the baseline for all future tourism.

1917: the Germans leveled most of the city and then, for reasons known only to God, the French rebuilt it afterwards. During WW1, Reims was spared total destruction when a city employee politely asked the Germans to knock it the hell off, and the Germans, unable to tell the difference between shell damage and Reims in general, marched off to Verdun where many would count their luck to be on the front lines and not stuck in Reims overnight.

Now, in a blessing that almost certainly proves the existence of a loving god, the train station is a relatively short walk from aforementioned cathedral, thus sparing the average tourist a fighting chance against dying of boredom. That's not to say that Reims is an utter waste of time. There's a lovely shopping arcade, um, some streets, uhhhhh . . . I think I saw a midget there, too.

So, in conclusion, if you like cathedrals (or midgets), Reims might be worth your while. But I doubt it.

-- Mike Beebe

I've had this experience from time to time. Certainly, energy level plays a role. Trips where I'm exhausted at the start have been low points. But, mostly, for me, I think it relates to my pre-trip preparations. There's a sweet spot between studying/planning so much there are no surprises or flashes of insight and knowing nothing and having no sense of where I am or where to go. With extensive preparation (like when I have a year to research), I become sort of a tour guide for those I travel with and feel responsible if things go awry, so I'm always evaluating and not experiencing. Plus, I'm driving hard to see "what must be seen". With no prep, I'm at the mercy of some one else's priorities, sense of direction, and timing. And I don't know anything about what I'm seeing or doing and I have no framework to build my experience on. But, when I schedule trips just a couple months out, the travel seems fresher, new and exciting.

Two words...Los Angeles. Sorry Callifornians it just didn't do anything for me. Had a good time but OMG the traffic and just too crowded and I live in South Florida.

It was in 1918 that Reims was specifically the German offensive target for strictly military reasons, their last offensive included Reims and Chateau Thierry, ie, those crucial days of July 1918 for the Germans when US troops were injected into blunting their offensive.

I saw Reims only once, went specifically there in 1984 as a day trip from Montmirail (the Montmirail of Napoleon fame, the Napoleon monument there attests to that) for two reasons, first, most importantly, to see the Surrender Museum of 1945 in that red brick building, and #2 to see the cathedral.

I become sort of a tour guide for those I travel with and feel responsible if things go awry ...

Pollyhrae: That was exactly my situation on the over-planned Venice stop, which very likely also affected my feelings about the place.

Wow, we liked Reims with the history, Chagall Windows in the cathedral, WWI and II history, the Champagne houses.
I see people raving about places I am glad I have seen but would never return to such as Vienna, been there twice. Good pastries were a plus but the city did nothing for me. Boring, gray. Paris is nice but I am not over the top crazy about it like some members of my family. I adore Greece but will never return to overcrowded, overhyped Santorini, two times was more than enough.
The local food is very important to me. I do not like a steady diet of German or Central European food.
I love Asia most of all and in Europe, favourites are Italy, Spain, London, The Netherlands, and Greece.

Most places I go I look at real estate, imagine what it would be like to live there, and wonder if I could afford it! I love everywhere I have gone with one exception...a small, coastal town that had absolutely ZERO redeeming qualities to it. There was no beauty, nothing at all of interest, the people were sullen, half the shops were empty, and we couldn't wait to get out of there! We spent most of our time in restaurants and bars trying to keep busy and left as soon as we could the next day.

Amsterdam for me. I was only there for one day, but saw all I needed to see. I know its very popular with young folks, but I dont find the marijuana culture and the red light district to be a reason to go there.

"a small, coastal town that had absolutely ZERO redeeming qualities to it. There was no beauty, nothing at all of interest, the people were sullen, half the shops were empty, and we couldn't wait to get out of there!"

Ah, good ol' Aberdeen, Washington.

It is not, as several comments propose, a simple matter of different strokes for different folks. There are places that are famous only for being famous-- all skin but no meat. Read through the posts and some meatless cites pop up over and over-- Paris, Milan, Florence, Munich. My list of don't waste your time here is Paris, Berlin, Munich, Florence, Venice, Bern, and Changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace.

I can't find where I actually did this so I can't show you the exact numbers, , but the Michelin Guide web site can be used to fine tune the rough quality of cities by calculating the total # of stared sights and the % of all of those that get 3 stars. When I did that for London, Berlin, and Munich, London blew the other two away.

My only complaint with the OP is that she was too tentative. Advice on what to avoid may be more important to good trip planning than is advice on what to see. Everybody should come right out and say, "here's what's bad about this place". RS should require those offering advice to list the 3 best things, three OK things, and 3 skip it things for every place commented on.

To understand why Berlin is not worth a visit, go to the Michelin web site for London which lists 452 tourist attractions in London. Go through the list, especially the highest rated sights, and ask yourself, did this sight exist before 1945 or was it a post war creation? You will find that almost all recommended to see sites are old (historic)— pre 1945. London is a historic city, which tourists love. Because Berlin decided to rebuild in modern style rather than restore the historic city. Berlin is a modern city and tourists to the EU don’t want see modern cites. Tourists want to see historic, not modern.

There are 452 Michelin recommended sights in historic London but only 149 Michelin sights in Berlin because WWII destroyed most of the historic city and Berlin rebuilt as a post 1950, boring, modern city. Of Berlin’s 9 * sights, only 3 are historic buildings and the common illustrative photo of the fake news “Historic Center” features a TV broadcasting tower. TV is not historic. TV is modern and so is Berlin and that’s why tourists should skip it.

Like London, Rome is historic, not modern, with 203 Michelin sights. 100% of the 45 top sights are old. Most tourists who travel to cites go to see history, not modernity. Berlin is modern, and therefore of scant touristic value, unlike London and Rome.

. I compared my favorite cites in Europe— London, Rome, Prague, and Barcelona to two major cites that rebuilt modern after WWII rather than restoring their historic appearance, Berlin and Cologne. From Michelin, I list three comparisons, 1] the total number of listed sights, 2] the total number of sights rated ***, and the % of all listed sights rating **. It is clear that the modern cites are not places for tourists.

recommended sights: Prague 117, Berlin 149, London 452, Rome 203, Cologne 23, Barcelona 128
*** sights: Prague 22, Berlin 9, London 22, Rome 45, Cologne 1, Barcelona 10
% *** sights: Prague 19%, Berlin 6%, London 5%, Rome 22%, Cologne 4%, Barcelona 8%

It is clear that the modern cites are not places for tourists

Maybe for your travel interests, but that is quite the blanket statement. What about:

New York
Miami
Tokyo
Osaka
Honolulu

All places I have recently visited as a tourist and had a great time.

Besides 80-90% of Barcelona is less than 150 years old. Like Paris, the Barcelona you know today was really built in the 19th century. The Gothic Quarter? Most of those buildings were built in the 19th and early 20th centuries, little remains that is truly medieval.

Just got back from 5 weeks in Europe , visited some old favourites and some new places .

Prague was new for us - I allowed 5 nights - which turns out was 3 nights too many for us .

Buildings in old town are of course beautiful- but Prague just didn’t click for us otherwise . Very touristy , expensive , and the only locals who were nice to us were those who had a financial interest in doing so . Had people literally turn their heads away from us very pointedly if you tried to approach for directions , and a tram driver smashed her hand ) thumped ) on the plexiglass screen around her to motion my hubby to hurry up - I’ve never seen any public employee behave that way in any country - it was like “Helga the prision guard “ she scared me !

I did like some of the food though - dumplings etc ! And the Museum of Communism was very interesting .
Best part of whole visit was long walk through gorgeous park across the river ! Sorry can’t recall name - but it was recommended by our hotel clerk when we told him we wanted out of city , he was right , it was lovely .

Well it’s off the bucket list now - wouldn’t go back .

Paul is the frozen North - Athens is absolutely my least favourite city in Europe !

However the less touristy Greek islands are absolutely my favourite places in Europe ! We have to fly in and out of Athens usually - but we just stay at airport hotels now and don’t go in city at all ! It’s gritty and dirty and ugly to me .

Just want to encourage you though to look at an island like Paros or Naxos - we just spent two weeks between them out of five week trip ( just returned 3 days ago ) and we loved loved those islands - we had to stay a few nights in Mykonos to fly out to Paris at end of trip and that was a mistake booking more than the one night in that overly priced tourist trap .

@Mike Beebe...nope! Not Aberdeen. It was in Europe...

This is such an interesting thread to read!
There are many who think a place must have history to be interesting. But some places without a critical mass of historic sights often have some of the best art and culture scenes - Berlin is one that comes to mind.
Others that think architecture is the most important thing - if they don't have this though then there is often a long folk history or natural beauty...many places in Scandinavia would fit this description.
One man's champagne is another's beer I guess.
That's what I love about travel...you can almost always find something of interest to you personally. If you don't then it's easy to move on.

All of my 24 trips to Europe have included Paris and Berlin, minus one time for each city., no Paris in 1971, no Berlin in 1977. . Unthinkable going to Germany without including a stay in Berlin, if only for 3-4 full days.

Likewise with going to France, skipping Paris is not an option. A day trip from Paris is usually included, be it going north, south, or east of Paris. . Lots of towns to visit that way...Reims, Amiens, Meaux, Fontainebleau, Troyes, Compiegne, Soissons, Saumur, Bayeux, Caen, etc.

People choice always vary. Some people like a place and some don't. I liked the Paris at my first visit.

I do think it’s different strokes though.

I’ll take Berlin as an example. I haven’t been and am not horribly interested (I’d go if there was a reason, I’m not opposed it’s just not a priority). A previous poster listed it as not worth it and on one hand I can see why. However my cousin is an artist and loves the art scene there. A WWII history nut would probably really value that part of the city. So personal interest is a big driver. Florence is another such place - if you don’t like Renaissance art it might not be a great choice. If you love that era it’s a can’t miss city.

And look at Paris. In this thread we are getting a solid mix of opinions on Paris. I would say that no one is “wrong”, it’s just a matter of personality or interest or situation.

Finally - Granada. My favorite place in Europe. Described by others as too touristy or too (something negative implying unclean or unsafe, like seedy or gritty). I obviously find it neither of those things, I find it magical. But it isn’t pristine and perfect - that’s a positive to me, apparently a negative to others.

This has certainly been an interesting and enlightening read.

It got me thinking. I don't think there has been a place that didn't click for me. I wondered why. Is it luck, preparation or attitude? I decided it was all three. There are places I prefer and some places that are on the bottom of my return list, but I can't think of a place we've been that I would say I'd never go back.

The mode of travel is a different story. We travel independently and love the freedom to tailor our trips to meet our needs. There are situations where I can see us taking a tour, such as some places in Eastern Europe where logistics might be harder to arrange.

The one mode of travel I see us never taking is large ship cruising. I have friends at work who love to cruise. After talking with them, there's nothing about cruising that appeals to me. We might enjoy a cruise in Alaska or Scandinavia, but I would be willing to pay more to be on a smaller boat.

Of the modes of travel we've used, my least favorite was the Viking Rhine River cruise we took. I remember standing on deck while we sailed through the most picturesque segment of the Rhine, longing to be off the boat and in a car so we could explore the charming villages we passed. Instead, we were stuck on a boat on a trip that cost way more than we normally spend, eating mediocre food, taking excursions where either the audio system didn't work or the guide was disinterested and putting up with inescapable obnoxious fellow passengers.