San Francisco really isn't that interesting, IMHO

In My Humble Opinion
21

Let’s see, I’ve been to:

San Francisco; good food, but whatever.
Tokyo; too many people, whatever,
Prague; old buildings. Who cares?
Moscow; poor people, whatever,
Vladivostok; too windy, whatever,
Paris; more old buildings and stuff, whatever,
Munich; oh, they have a nude park, whatever,
London; ooh, bars and a subway with regular bomb threats. Food sucks.

Okay, I’m bored. I could name more, but my point is I’m detecting a theme from the OP, and I don’t think it’s worth trying to convince him he missed something cool in SF. He’ll never see it.

I can’t WAIT 'til I get to Australia and get to give an OP style review of that place.

22

I think the OP is insane. I have only been to San Francisco once about 5 years ago. I was the caretaker for our 6 month old daughter for a week and that sucked but my MIL relieved me for a day. I walked the entire city by myself and it took me 11 hours. I wasn’t looking for anything in particular which may be the problem with the OP. I just took it all in and had a great time. I probably walked about 20 miles in that time. I was not impressed by Fisherman’s Wharf. However, I loved the Haight-Ashbury district. Golden Gate Park was great. I could kick myself for not going into the Crazy Horse strip club.

We went out to eat every night. San Fran has some of the best food in the world. If you want formal attractions, I have no idea what to say to that. If you just want to walk and experience things like I do, it is great. Washington DC is much better for formal attractions than San Fran is.

23

I’m sorry, but having been to both Fresno and SF on the same trip, I can categorically state that SF is more interesting.

24

I think that’s more true of L.A., actually. What with the freeways, traffic, and pretty much needing your car to go anyplace, I’d think this town would be maddening to a visitor. And it’s not as if there’s much to look at when you’re stuck in traffic. I’m willing to defend our cultural institutions down here, but I’m not going to try to tell you it’s a beautiful place–unless you know where to look, and that’s where locals come in. For instance, you’d never guess that 100 yards from where I sit in my living room typing this, there’s a pond and spring that never run dry, and where herons occasionally visit. Or ibises. Or curlews. Or whatever those tall birds with the long straw-like legs are.

Compared to that, San Francisco is easy.

25

I’m an Australian who’s been to San Francisco several times, and who finds it one of the best cities in the US to viit, so I’d better comment on this one.

I think that’s the first mistake: to me, the Australian city that San Francisco is most like is Melbourne, even down to the weather. I’ve been to Brisbane many times, and once you get more than a few kilometres away from the CBD, it’s just endless suburbia, until you get a really long way away (like the Gold Coast), when you start finding beaches and national parks.

The big things that SF and Melbourne have in common are good public transport and lots of interesting neighbourhoods. So my advice to a visitor to SF is to get a good map showing all the bus, train and streetcar routes, get a multiday Muni pass, and explore the different neighbourhoods.

There are lot of interesting museums in SF, but they aren’t all in one area: you’ve got to travel around to find them. There’s also a good zoo, in a distant corner of the city, but at the end of a streetcar line (of course!).

You only need a car if you are getting out of the city, so driving on the wrong side of the road isn’t a problem.

Oh, and Fisherman’s Wharf is not really such a wonderful attraction, even though all the tourists go there: it’s rather tacky and over-priced.

26

Martini Enfield, as a person who loves San Francisco and lives near it, I just want to say I have no problem with that. I may love this city, but everybody’s got different tastes. All my ire should be directed at silenus :wink: - dear gawd, Fresno?!? The horror… :eek:

27

I think it’s a better place to live than to visit. The tourist stuff is kinda boring here…

Joe

28

Assuming this is a serious opinion, you must be smoking crack. I lived in SF for 6 years, Fresno for 6, then moved back to SF. Fresno is a disaster, the anus of California. A city-sized strip mall filled with rednecks of all races. Plus, 100 degrees every fricking day in the summer.

Blech!

Joe

29

I have to agree. The thing is that most American cities, much of the valuable and nice places to live are not in the city center. The inner cities are generally poor and run down which is not the case in most of the world.

I visit SFO about once a year for business and I have no idea how there are so many homeless people in San Francisco… more than I have seen in any other city in Europe or the Mid East. I think it ruins the city.

30

My partner’s from San Francisco, her mother still lives there, and we visit the city at least once a year, and often two or three times. I love it, and i think my appreciation for it grows the more i visit. It’s a city that really rewards knowing where the good little places are, and doing things that are not of the regular tourist route.

I can sort of understand the reasons why a first-time tourist might wonder why there isn’t more to do. Much of my love for the city comes from discovering (or being shown by my wife) places that tourists are unlikely to go. It’s a city that really benefits the traveler who knows a few locals.

But still, to be honest, on my first visit i found the city as interesting and exciting as just about any other city i’d ever visited. Even the regular tourist attractions are great, although you can certainly take a bit more advantage of the Bay Area if you’re willing to drive a car. Places like Muir Woods, Marin County, wine country, Half Moon Bay, the Winchester House, and Monterey Bay Aquarium are all within a day trip of the city.

One thing i love about SF is that, as Shagnasty’s post reveals, it’s a fabulous walking city. Sure, the public transit is good, but San Francisco really rewards getting your walking shoes on and just strolling through the neighborhoods. I can spend hours wandering through the Mission and all the way up to Russian Hill and North Beach, with a bunch of interesting places in between. One thing i really love doing is a personal walking tour of the murals in the Mission; some of them are really amazing.

San Francsico is also, despite the hills, a great place to ride. One of my favorite things is to rent a bike at Golden Gate Park and ride out through the avenues, up to the Legion of Honor, and then down through the huge houses on El Camino Del Mar, up to the Golden Gate Bridge, then through the Presidio. Or across the Bridge, up into the Marin Headlands, and then down to Sausalito before catching the ferry back over to the city. When the weather’s good, there’s no better way to see the city and its surrounds.

As others have noted, the food is awesome, especially for vegetarians like me. From the taquerias in the Mission (Pancho Villa is my favorite) to the great vegetarian and macrobiotic cafes, to the excellent Chinese food in Chinatown and out on Clement Street. And if you want meat, there’s everything from super-cheap to ultra-high-end.

For the Aussies, i sort of agree with Giles that it’s similar to Melbourne. I’d go a little further, though, and say that it combines some of the best features of Melbourne and Sydney, in a city that’s more compact than either of them.

31

Part of the reason SF gets the glowing reputation it does is because it gets credit for much of the surrounding area. Too many travel mags and programs talk about Napa and the Redwood forest as if it’s part of SF and right next door. Heck, many people seem to think that the East and South Bay is a short stroll away.

I agree with the OP in that many of the “famous” attractions are underwhelming. The city is cool in that it has a very distinct sense of place, which is why many locals are so proud of it, but that’s not something that will wow you until you’ve been immersed in it for a extended period of time.

In a way, it seems like a very good place to go for a Honeymoon. My idea of a honeymoon doesn’t involve tourist traps and walking tours, it involves lots of intimate dinners and rudderless wandering in between bedroom aerobics. For that type of trip a distinct and compact place like SF would be just about perfect, you’d definitely have a memorable backdrop for the week and you don’t need to trouble yourself with being on time for events or feel like you missed out on sightseeing opportunities that might take some mental energy to appreciate.

32

The botanical garden at the golden Gate park should be able to keep any relatively sentient being fascinated for a week.

As a plus, you can cross that big ole bridge and see Dan Hicks do a jazz set in a little bar.

33

The thing was that we did try and investigate it via Teh Intarwebs and Teh Guidebookz, and were concerned at the lack of interesting stuff we found. Of course, by that stage the flights had been booked and paid for (by my generous parents) so we figured we’d see what we found when we were there. I knew nothing at all about Tijuana when we went to see it beyond the fact it was in Mexico, and I loved the place.

Part of the thing is that my wife and I are not big “Foodie” people. I don’t want trendy cafes or obscure restaurants that opened last Thursday and will be closed by Monday week but serve the best Venison schnitzel cooked with Panda’s Milk. Not our thing at all.

I’ve only been to Melbourne once, but I really liked it. I’ve been to Sydney a few times and I like it there too. Brisbane has an international airport. I won’t argue with anyone who reckons Brisbane is disappointing/boring/uninteresting, because I’d agree completely with them. :smiley:

34

I did exactly the same thing. I walked everywhere. I thought it was a really beautiful city. There’s no point in looking for specific places to go - the whole place is one big attraction. Although I did like the sealions at FW.

35

Eating at Burma Superstar makes the trip out there worth it by itself.

36

I like stumbling onto things I didn’t know were there, and SF is great for that. We found ourselves at the Legion of Honor one trip, and I wandered over to look down the hill at the city, and found one of the most moving (and harrowing) Holocaust memorials I have ever seen.

I saw no sign or indication that it was behind and below that group of trees. I generally don’t use a city guide so maybe it was just me who didn’t know it was there, though. :slight_smile:

37

I’ve been to San Francisco several times, and it’s beautiful but incredibly overrated. I have not found the locals to be very friendly. While the shopping is fantastic, the aggressive panhandlers make walking around an annoying, sometimes frightening experience. I wish I was more of a seafood person, but I’m not. Last time we visited some friends in SF, they took us to an Italian restaurant in North Beach which they had heard wonderful things about - however the food turned out to be mediocre and the prices sky-high. Our friends were embarrassed. It was sort of representative of our whole trip. shrug Maybe we just haven’t been to the right places yet.

I did love two places - Alcatraz, and Amoeba Music. What a great record store.

38

Actually, compared to what you can get in Brisbane, the food in San Francisco is good but not that great. Where SF has an edge in food is better and more authentic Mexican in the Mission. It would be interesting to compare the Japanese food in both cities: SF probably has the biggest concentration of Japanese restaurants in the US in its Japantown, but I suspect that Brisbane does pretty well in that area because of all the Japanese tourists going there. (I haven’t tried Japanese fod in Brisbane so I’m guessing there). However, for seafood, I think Brisbane’s likely to be the better choice.

39

I havent been to either place but IMHO, Sydney looks so much more interesting than San Francisco.

So does Melbourne.

I’d like to visit San Francisco one day, don’t get me wrong, but the earthquake prone-ness of the area is a bit of a turn-off.

40

I spent a day in San Francisco. I probably could have spent another, but more than that and I probably would have been bored. In that one day, I saw Alcatraz, walked along Fisherman’s Wharf, rode a cable car, drove down Lombard Street, visited the Exploratorium and looked at and drove over the Golden Gate Bridge.

However, the city makes a nice (if expensive) “hub” for an overall trip around Northern California, if you have a car. The rest of that week I went to Redwood country, San Jose, Monterrey, Sequoia National Park and Yosemite National Park. I’m not into wine, but someone who is would no doubt spend a day in Napa Valley as well.