Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
The Five Most Overrated Tourist Attractions
The U.K. newspaper isn't afraid to criticize one of the motherland's top tourist attractions either, putting Stonehenge at the top of the list. They note that you can't touch the monument, or even walk around it, and it isn't exactly located in one of the most scenic locations either. As an alternative, the Times suggests that you skip "the Henge" and visit nearby Avebury, which has a larger stone monolith that allows for more access to the public.
The other four sites on the list that they recommend that you avoid include Petra, Jordan, the Colosseum in Rome, Machu Picchu in Peru, and Angkor, Cambodia. Generally, the Times is put off by the large crowds they attract, as well as the inconvenience of coming and going from these famous spots, several of which are fairly remote.
Personally, I think this list is best used as a way of keeping your expectations within reason when traveling to these sites that have become overrun with tourists. For instance, who in their right mind wouldn't want to visit Machu Picchu when traveling to Peru? Just be aware that it is a crowded monument and getting there isn't always easy. Patience will go a long way towards providing an enjoyable experience.
Those looking for new places to visit, off the beaten path a bit, will enjoy the alternatives suggested in the article however, as they are generally less crowded and are not on the radar for most travelers. Their alternative suggest for Machu Picchu for instance is the Isla del Sol in Bolivia, which is a much quieter location when compared to the Peruvian landmark.
So, what do you think of the list? What would you add to it? Any experiences with the ones they've selected?