- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
It's about the same cost. We'll be going to Paris too. We are into food, museums, and romance!
Has anybody with experience ready to offer up ur opinion? We are planning to book this week.
I'm soooo jealous!! but i say venice because it's sinking (isn't it?) and you'd be able to tell your grandkids about when you visited.
Could you pick a more impossible choice? ;) I spent a few days in both in 2007 and I say it depends on how much time you have. Venice is very small, but very romantic. And touristy. If you have a very short amount of time (three days or less), I think you should go to Venice! It's relaxing and there are some great restaurants. At least, I remember having a lot of good coffee. ;) But if you have a lot of time, it could possibly get repetitive. It's SMALL.
If you have more time, Rome offers a lot more to see. But I was there for three days, and that was not enough time (AT ALL) to see even close to all that this HUGE city has to offer. You'll find more museums, more foodie options, but I didn't find it that romantic--I just found it to be a huge, beautiful city.
I think you'd enjoy either one; good luck deciding!
I've been to Venice once and Rome twice. I'm not sure I'll go to Venice again but I hope I get to visit Rome many more times. I agree with Marigold re how much time you have, although I think you would enjoy Rome for 2-3 days you wouldn't even scratch the surface of what there is to see, whereas you'd be able to see most of Venice in that time. It also depends on how much time you spend in Paris and how you are travelling between the two, what season it will be, and how much $ you have to spend. Is there any way you can do both? We went from Paris to Rome on an overnight train, had 3 or 4 days there and then got the train to Venice for another couple of days and it worked well.
3 days in each...short vacation...yes, we are leaning toward Venice too... :)
Oh man, it sucks to be you. ;)
I loved Venice. But Rome has so much history. Hmmm...
I've only been to Venice. I spent two days there and was ready to leave after about a day and a half. Granted it is a tourist destination, but there were sooo many tourists until you wandered way off the beaten path. I got tired of fighting through crowds. If you want a relaxed pace, then Venice would be okay (and I was a sucker for the gondola ride). My guess is Rome would have way more options and things to do, but then if it were me, I would feel like I have too much to see/do in the 3 days.
I've never been to Europe, but I voted Rome just because I am not the biggest fan of SUPER touristy areas and from what I have heard, Venice definitely is...but really, you can't lose either way, they both seem spectacular!
Ahh, I'm jealous! I've never been to either, but one of my best friends went to Ireland for a study abroad and took trips all over Europe. She loved Rome, but only found Venice to be okay, she said Rome was more fun to explore.
I would actually do Florence... but out of Rome & Venice, I would probably do Rome... but question for you, when are you going? because Venice in the late fall is lovely, venice in the summer is miserable and smelly!
With only three days, I have to agree with Venice as well. It also depends on what you are going for, if you really want to see the best of tourim and what Italy has to offer, and you don't think you'll ever be back to Italy, then Rome is your place. However, you can DO Venice in three days, whereas Rome, you definitely wont have time to see it all: The sistine chapel, the Pantheon, the Colisseum, Trevi Fountain, St. Peters Basillica, the list goes ON! My husband and I drove through all of Italy, spent 4.5 days in Rome (BARELY FIT IT ALL IN), 1 day in Pisa, 1 Day in Florence, and 2.5 Days in Venice. I must say, we were kind of bored in Venice after just ONE day. We did the gondola ride (where hubby proposed!), we saw St. Mark's, some other small touristy areas I can't remember the name of etc. There was a Da'Vinci museum, but it absolutely sucked. They didn't have one thing actually made my Da'Vinci there, just replications. Good luck with your choice!
ROME! I studied in Italy for a semester. We spent a weekend in Venice and I wasn't all that impressed (just my opinion). The gondala's were really expensive, pigeons were everywhere and unless you like blown glass its not nearly as nice as Rome. Rome has far more history, some of the best works of art and amazing restaurants. Please please choose Rome :)
Now, I studied at Florence University (Firenze) so Rome was about a 4 hour drive so we only went for about 4 days. BUT, we were able to cover a lot of ground... literally, because you walk a lot. I'm sure you'll love it!
What about Florence? That's perfect, if you love food, museums and romance...
I LOVE Venice, though. Rome's great to visit, but I wouldn't necessarily call it romantic. But you'll make your own romance, I'm sure.
Are you definitely stuck on going to Paris? If not, how about a tour of italy by train? Fly into Venice, spend two days, train to Florence and spend a few days, then end with a few days in Rome. Best of all worlds! :) (with side trips out to the countryside, of course!)
I was going to say exactly what Marigold said. Venice is just incredible. Florence is still my favorite, but Venice was close behind it. I wasn't the hugest fan of Rome - once you see the architecture and the Vatican, youre kinda done. Its like any big city, just more ruins. Thats my HO. Since you only have 3 days, its large enough that you wont get bored, but small enough that you wont miss any of the major things you would want to see. I am soooo jealous :) we're going in September and I cannot WAIT
One of my DREAM places to see as a child was Venice. I got to go when I was 19 and we left more than satisfied about 8 hrs later for Rome. I LOOOOVED Rome! There is so much to do and see and so much history there!
I say do both, but make venice and excursion.
Whoops! I hit "Definetely Rome" when I meant "Definitely Venice" so fix those votes in your head ;-)
I echo the others in Florence over either, it's so beautiful and relaxing which I think a honeymoon should be! There is a lot to see in Rome, but I was so stressed out the whole time! I felt like I had to be on high alert for not getting scammed (like watch out for anyone who offers to take your picture, tries to hand you a rose, blah blah blah the way they can scam tourists is an art!), and even so it felt like we were constantly getting ripped off by waiters, etc. So after a few days of that, I was tired of Rome! Also (we went there in May) it was soooo full of tourists, you couldn't even get pictures of things. It was amazing to see some of the sites, but even though I didn't see everything I still doubt I'd ever go back.
I'm so jealous! I'd love to go to Italy! I REALLY want to go before we have kids, so perhaps we will go for our first anniversary.
I really wasn't that impressed with Venice - I would def vote Rome or Florence
I vote both! They both have their wonders. And they are not that far apart :)
Venezia! It was one of the most unique experiences of my life. Gondolla ride, amazing, photos, FRIENDLY people, amazing food(simple, delegant, delicious) San Marco Plaza. You're knees shake because you can't beleive you are there.
Essence of La Dolce Vita!
I say Venice because I heard that Rome has a very bad rat problem. You're welcome. :)
Wow, thanks for the insight...Keep 'em coming this week b/c I want to book in the next few days with the wedding money burning a hole in my pocket.
So here's the deal:
I love Paris, FI really wants italy. So we're doing both in April on a limited budget and timeframe. Keep in mind, we will be doing a bunch of running around in Paris first.
What we like about Rome is...well, it's Rome. But now you have me curious about Florence too. What we like about Venice is that u can walk to everything and it is sorta a wind-down after Paris (the Louvre/cafes!), and we can pretty much cover the whole thing in our 3 nights there. As long as it has good food and beautiful landscape, with a few cultural attractions, I'm good to go. FI is NOT even as picky as he has never been out of the country before. My family is all in the travel business (OZ, NZ, islands not Europe though) so I've been around... but I want him to begin to have some experience and confidence in planning these trips (for the future!). I told him, he's 'in charge' of planning Italy and I will do Paris. i'm a little concerned about him having to navigate intensely in foreign countries etc for too many days, as to not stress him out.However, initial guidance on which city is a shared decision.
FYI-Our mini-moon was in Lanai--a small historical, intimate, quaint town, everyone thought we'd be bored to death but it's ideal for couples, not single travelers who didn't care for it.
Ok, y'all Travel Bees...you're getting me super excited!!!
PS our first kiss and time we said I love you was on a chauffered outrigger canoe for 2 on my birthday... FI wanted to simulate a 'local version' of a Venice Gondola ride... :)
You can't go wrong either way. You'll have a fabulous time. How bout a day trip to one of them while you're there? If you do Florence (the other love of my life) you can easily do a day trip to both since it's in the middle. Oh, you cannot go wrong with Italy! Congrats!
sorry, one more. if you're into museums, you obviously HAVE to see d'orsay and du louvre in Paris, and if it's down to venice or roma, rome definitely has more of the "have to sees" i would argue...but don't forget about Florence! The Uffizi (with all the Bottocellis and Da Vincis) and Michaelangelo's David are there! Oooh..I'm so living vicariously through you right now. Sorry! Hehe :)
I voted for Rome. We spent time in Rome on our honeymoon, and while it's true that you won't get to see everything in a few days, the same would be true even if you were to spend an entire month there. It's a beautiful city and we found it really romantic and fun - we spent one evening just wandering around andfound this old wooden toy shop, where we bought some toys for our future children. It wasn't a planned "site to see" but it's one of my favourite memories from our trip.
Florence was just so beautiful and relaxing - I'd definitely consider it. And if you like art/architecture it is an amazing city to see - basically every major Italian Renaissance artist is represented there!
But between Rome and Venice I'd vote Rome hands down. There's more to do, you can cover a lot in 3-4 days, and the people were just so much nicer. I spoke fluent Italian when I went (study aborad program) and the people in Rome were so lovely once they saw that I was trying to speak in their native language. Whereas the people in Venice were downright nasty in some locations! Plus I hated that all the restaurants close to the piazzas were overpriced and had "tourist menus" - yes they print that right on the menu! Ha - and as a poor college student I loved that Rome had cheap, pelntiful water fountains. Paying 2+ euros for bottles of water in the summer got old real fast!
For SURE Venice (I studied abroad in Italy and spent time in both cities). The secret to Venice is to get off the beaten path and wonder around the neighborhoods. Leave the tourist areas, and you'll find quiet sidewalks with Italian women hanging their laundry, romantic places to have a glass of wine, etc.
I'm surprised to see how mnay people chose Venice. So far I've heard a mix of positive s and negatives about Venice. But we stayed off the beaten path, and just absolutely loved it. We thought it was uber romantic and relaxing!
Definitely Rome! If you at all are into museums/events, Venice is kind of a flop. I spent a few days there two years ago and got bored pretty quickly. The novelty of the canals wears off and you're just wandering a city (even if it's a very beautiful city). I felt more tourist-overwhelemed there, as well.
Rome, on the other hand. Rome never disappoints. I've been there three times now and every time am like, man, I wish I had more time in Rome. There are enough people that, even with all the tourists, you still feel like you're in an Italian city and the entertainment never ends. Nightlife/wandering city/museums/culture - Rome has it all!
We did Italy for our honeymoon, and while I loved Venice and Rome, hands down I would pick Florence for food, culture, ambiance, side trips to the tuscan countryside.
http://www.rachspiegel.com/blogfiles/photos/20090421tuscany/2917tuscany102207-Edit-2.jpg
if not florence, than Venice for sure, getting lost walking over tiny bridges is SO romantic, although it depends on the time of year you decide to go. Rome is just a big crowded noisy city.
Venice is SO romantic. You should look at Florence and the Tuscan countryside, too... but Venice is always a winner in my book. I loved the Vatican, but other than that, I thought Rome was kind of overrated.
Either will be great, Venice is so romantic to me but you really cant go wrong with those two.
Rome is my favorite place on EARTH, so I voted Rome, but that was before I saw you only had 3 days. Venice might actually be better for that amount of time because 3 days doesn't do Rome justice and 3 days is about all I could take of Venice. Think: wall-to-wall tourists herding through thin, winding alleyways. Don't get me wrong, Venice is amazing and a great experience, but you'll be totally over the crowds after 3 days. Worth it, though. Save Rome - you'll want more than 3 days, trust me.
Here's a B&B in Venice where we stayed-- very reasonable rates, for the great location it's in: http://www.residenzalequattrostagioni.it/the_residence.html
I second (or third or more) others by suggesting Florence. Rome is beautiful but definitely bigger, and I hated Venice when I went - it was sooo crowded that I felt like I was at Disneyland. There isn't as much to see and the gondola rides and food are EXPENSIVE (Venice's food was my least favorite when I spent 5 weeks in Italy and they charged major bucks for water). Also, there are a lot less museums and things in Venice. If it has to be Rome or Venice, I say Rome - be sure to walk across the city and see all the sites at night.
BUT, I really really vote Florence. It has TONS of history and things to do/see, but it's also smaller and super romantic. See Michelangelo's David. Eat at Mastrocilegia and Acqua al Due and get gelato at Vivoli. Hike up to the Piazza della Michelangelo for a picnic at sunset (and get buffalo mozzarella and focaccia bread at the farmer's market for the picnic!) You can also do wine tours through Tuscany and you're just a short train ride from Pisa, Siena, and (My favorite place in the world!) the beautiful coastal cities of Cinque Terre. GO TO FLORENCE!
I think we are all forgetting she is coming from a very busy touristy trip through Paris first, and really wants to RELAX in Italy. I keep my vote as Venice, because while I really think Rome has so much more to offer, her and hubby will NOT be able to relax in Rome. They will spend 8 hour days walking trying to fit everything in! Though the Colisseum at night is one of the most romantic things I ever saw. Ugh, I'm probably not helping lol!
Colonight.JPG (32 KB, 42 downloads) 2 years old
Grr, try again
Colonight.JPG (32 KB, 35 downloads) 2 years old You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| MissBoPeep | 52 |
| hisgoosiegirl | 38 |
| Mrs.KMM | 36 |
| ndreighton | 36 |
| beargoose | 34 |
| akp0702 | 34 |
| BetterSherm | 31 |
| Beckster329 | 28 |
| Gemstone | 27 |
| KatNYC2011 | 25 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| mavideniz | 4 |
| AstoriaKatie | 1 |
| RahlyRah | 1 |
| StaceyA | 1 |
| sedmikraska | 1 |
| Jessy727 | 1 |
