Can we do Venice in a day?

[NewCruiserMPC]

We are doing a cruise next year (June).

 

Our cruise ends in Rome. We are planning to fly back home from London since it is a bit cheaper. We are thinking of doing this:

 

Option #1

Rome - 3 days

London - 2 days

 

Is there any way to squeeze Venice in for a day? And just do 2 days in Rome? Or do you recommend 3 full days in Rome then just skip Venice.

[mskaufman]

That depends on you and your travel habits. Do you prefer to just view the sites and take pictures or do you prefer a more in depth visit? Do you spend time in museums. For example, are you planning to spend time in the Vatican Museum? With good planning, it is possible to see a lot of Venice in a day. Last year we had an overnight there on our cruise and it worked out fine. If we had another day, there are other places we would have gone. My recommendation is to plan out your days in Rome and figure out if two days will do the trick for you. You will probably wind up answering the question yourself.

[cruisemom42]

The problem with the idea of doing Venice in a day is that it takes some time to get there from Rome. Whether you fly or take the train, you're going to end up losing close to half a day in transportation to get there. Don't even think of doing it as a day trip (e.g., go from Rome and return to Rome).

 

I'd say that unless you can squeeze in another day, skip Venice this time out. You'll have fewer logistics to deal with and more time to just enjoy the experience. And you can certainly fill 3 days in Rome.

[agabbymama]

I agree with Cruisemom42. Venice isn't close to Rome, and you will spend most of your time in transit.

 

Rome took us 3 days to see. Then we had 3 days post cruise in Venice.

 

If you can't squeeze in another couple of days, it isn't worth the hassle or expense.

[John Bull]

Does "3 days in Rome" include your arrival day into Civi?

If so, allowing for travel from port & stowing luggage at your hotel makes that 2.5 days.

Or 1.5, if Rome is foreshortened to include Venice.

But that's enough if you're a "casual tourist". You'll have time to go into the Colosseum, the Forum, and with timed tickets the Vatican & Sistine Chapel. Plus Trevi (currently undergoing restoration & unworthy of a visit, don't know for how long), Spanish Steps, Pantheon, Piazza Navone.

You can include some of them in a night tour.

 

Same question applies to London. Allow up to an hour each way between airport & city, plus at least an hour for arrival formalities and two hours pre-flight check-in plus wiggle time.

Does that knock London from two days to one? :eek:

If so, it'll be a rushed visit. Time to see the place from atop a ho-ho, mebbe an inside visit to Westminster Abbey or St Paul's or Buck Palace or the Tower, or take a river cruise, but don't expect to perm more than two from that list. And probably you'll need to bypass all the city's wonderful & free museums.

 

Venice is relatively easy for the casual tourist. Excluding other islands or inside visits it's possible to get a good flavour of the place & wander the main attractions in less than a full day. Very economical on your time once you're in the city, and well worth visiting.

 

As other posts, it all depends on how in-depth you want to visit any of the three.

And whether you'll ever get the chance to visit again.

A flying visit is way better than no visit at all.

But for those with my limited attention-span, a quick visit usually means it's been ticked off my bucket list and unlike many I'm less-inclined to return - which I'm very aware is a great shame.

 

If you can put one of the three on the back-burner, then that's the way to go. Perhaps include Venice in a land trip covering Italy's lakes, the Alps, mebbe a foray into Switzerland or Austria or even southern Germany. Or on a future cruise - many many European cruises start or call at Venice.

 

But if this is likely to be a last-chance, don't miss the opportunity.

 

Just MHO as always.

 

JB :)

[CintiPam]

I recommend three full days in Rome and skip Venice. You cannot do Venice in one day, particularly considering the distance from Rome.

[ama]

While all the "major" sites in Venice could probably be seen in a whirlwind day, I personally would save it for another visit. When you factor in travel time - it's just a lot more running around and rushing from place to place. You just have to prioritize what you want to see. I would get a good guide book and narrow down what interests you, that will probably help solidify your decision. There are so many sights in Rome. Venice has a completely different feel and I think more of the charm is wandering the streets and taking in the canal and atmosphere. There are definately less "major" sights in Venice. Both are worthy to visit - but I would give more time, so you can truly enjoy and take it all in. Good luck and enjoy your cruise!

[Keith1010]

I would not do Venice in one day. Between getting there, settling in your hotel, etc you won't see much.

 

Keith

[wassup4565]

The problem with allocating so little time to Venice is that you'll discover one thing: You have to go back again. It was not enough. Mind you, discovering that is a good thing, since you will HAVE to go back again.

[Chuck]

I've somewhat come to the conclusion regarding seeing Europe off of a cruise ship is nearly impossible to do it any kind of justice. I have wrestled with this whole thing for a long while now. But when a cruise ship stops at a port of call for say 6 to 9 hours there is NO WAY you can see all the sights and surrounding areas of that city in Europe. After taking some 15 cruises its my conclusion to really see a country especially in Europe you really need to go thru one of the land companys that specialize in small groups of 12 to 24 guests. Then atleast you really will see that particular country in depth the way it should be seen. To get all these "little glimpses" of a city in Europe off of a cruise ship just doesn't do the trip any justice. You feel like you just got a very small taste of the chocolate dessert as they passed it down to the guy at the end of the table.

[wassup4565]

It depends how you look at it. We all have limited time and money. Of course we can't understand and appreciate a place with eight hours off a ship. But we can get a sense of the places we would go back to, right?

 

I said above, if you spend one day in Venice, you will find out you have to go back. I'm doing just that in two weeks. Getting off a cruise ship for a day taught me this is a place I had to go back to.

[Hartsj9]

Depends, does this 1 day in Venice include travel to and from Rome?

 

My husband and I spent a day in Venice while on a tour a few years ago. We took one of the first water taxis in first thing in the morn and one of the last ones out at night. We managed to visit the Doge's Palace (and wandered across the bridge of sighs into the dungeons), St Marc's basilica, went to the top of the Campanile, had lunch (expensive!), take a gondola ride, visit Correr Muesum, wander the little "streets" and do some shopping, visited the Rialto bridge, and had dinner. It's possible to see a lot in one day if you go, go, go. If this will be your one and on,y chance to see Venice then I'd try and make it work, otherwise save it for later.

[maryann ns]

I've somewhat come to the conclusion regarding seeing Europe off of a cruise ship is nearly impossible to do it any kind of justice. I have wrestled with this whole thing for a long while now. But when a cruise ship stops at a port of call for say 6 to 9 hours there is NO WAY you can see all the sights and surrounding areas of that city in Europe. After taking some 15 cruises its my conclusion to really see a country especially in Europe you really need to go thru one of the land companys that specialize in small groups of 12 to 24 guests. Then atleast you really will see that particular country in depth the way it should be seen. To get all these "little glimpses" of a city in Europe off of a cruise ship just doesn't do the trip any justice. You feel like you just got a very small taste of the chocolate dessert as they passed it down to the guy at the end of the table.

 

I agree, but would go further. The small group tour will give you perhaps half the chocolate dessert. To get all of it you need to travel on your own.

[rockdoctor]

I agree with Cruisemom42. Venice isn't close to Rome, and you will spend most of your time in transit.

 

Rome took us 3 days to see. Then we had 3 days post cruise in Venice.

 

If you can't squeeze in another couple of days, it isn't worth the hassle or expense.

 

Agree. We have spent 5 days in Venice and there is still a lot we haven't seem. Spend the extra time in Rome.

[DipBrat]

If there is a chance you won't make it back to Italy then I would spend the third day in Venice rather than another day in Rome. The logistics will be tough but if you are willing to do it you will certainly enjoy and get a good sense of Venice in one day.

[4774Papa]

We have been to Venice about five times and spent a total of about 14 days there. We could go back and see more that we didn't see.

 

However, I think 3 days is a minimum for Venice.

 

Rome, is a week, Florence 5 days.

 

Plan on going back. One day will not cut it.

[welove2cruise*]

Have spent six nights in Venice and looking forward to returning. Planning next time to stay in Lucca after Venice to do day trips to Cinque Terre (another of my favorite places), Pisa and end in Florence. Italy is a favorite for me.

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[angeleyes27]

It depends on how you travel, but you must be disciplined & get an early start & skip the line tickets. We did Rome in less than 2 days & Venice in a day. We got into Rome from Milan on a day. The next morning, we took the first train to Naples at 7am & went to Pompeii. We spend 3 1/2 hours in Pompeii which was enough in the heat. We got back to Rome around 5 or 6pm. We went to Spanish steps, Trevi Fountain & Piazza Navona that night & got gelato. The next morning, we ate breakfast, then took the metro to the Forum. We walked around the Forum until our Coloseum Underground tour at 10am. After our Colosseum tour, we took the Metro to the Pantheon, spent a half hour or so there, then had lunch in the area & more gelato. Then we took the Metro from the Spanish Steps to the Vatican. We got skip the line tickets for 2:45p or 3pm. We got into the Vatican & saw the Sistine Chapel & St. Peters Basilica. We then picked up our luggage at our hotel & took the 7pm fast train to Venice. The next morning, we had breakfast at the hotel & went to Doges palace before they opened. We were one of the first in line. After about 2 hrs in Doges Palace, we had skip the line tickets for St Mark's Basilica which we did next spending about an hour there. It was still before noon so we decided to squeeze in the Campanile, which we did. We then went & had lunch at Rialto Bridge area. We walked the back streets to San Ruocco & San Maria of the Friars church. We had extra time so we spent the rest of the day using the vaporettos on the Grand Canal. We even had time for a nap. The next day our train didn't leave until the afternoon, so we spent the morning (again getting up early) & seeing Burano & Murano. We had more extra time so we went to Lido as well. Then got our luggage & caught our train. So if we didn't go to Burano & Murano, then we would have Venice in a day although I would rather skip San Ruocco & see Murano instead. Hope that helps.

[angeleyes27]

I meant to say that we got into Rome late the night before from Milan, I believe around 9 or 10 pm. We were actually quite leisurely, but we had maps & a plan so we didn't dilly dally trying to figure out where we were going or how we were getting there. We got a 24 hour vaporetto pass in Venice.

However, I do agree that cruising makes it difficult to experience anywhere! When you stay somewhere, you get a real feel of what it is like to live there without having the pressure of needing to get back to the ship. We always travel like the locals & meet the locals so we feel like we are a part of that locale.

[angeleyes27]

I meant to say see Burano instead, although Murano was nice. I love the colored houses of Burano. Our cruise next year leaves out of Venice so the only thing we are doing is Burano & Murano. It is less congested than Venice. We didn't see some of the sights in those areas as we didn't know that we would have so much extra time. Taking a vaporetto around the Grand Canal is a great way to experience Venice. When in Rome, get a map & see sights in a general area & work out an efficient plan.