It's okay to hate good films though. A big part of appreciating culture is learning to recognize when something is good, but not for you. e.g. Many go gaga for Antonioni's "L'Avventura". It may have done some pretty revolutionary things for film, but I hate it with a passion. I can't stand it's plot structure and loathe every one of it's characters. I recognize that it is a good film, but also that it's not for me.
Be careful to say, "I didn't like that film" instead of "That is a bad film because I didn't like it".
Insufferable: He doesn't just convey a feeling to his audience. He makes the audience feel it directly. If he wants to convey boredom, he bores you. If he wants to convey patiences, he makes you wait patiently. If he wants to convey discomfort, he'll make you feel uncomfortable.
Mocking: He mocks his subjects in many ways, but mocking also seems to be his main way to express admiration. He mocks man's battle against nature. "Man is a fool. Nature wins" is a binding theme, yet he believes greatness only comes form that struggle (hunting in the taiga, an impromptu hike through France and Germany, Fitzcarraldo, playing chicken with an active volcano, etc). The more highly his subject thinks about himself (and it's always a "he"), the more he savages them with mockery (that includes all PhDs in his movies, and every character who wants to be on camera). The more prestigious the character, the more he lunges at them. And if he can't make them flinch with his mockery, he holds the shot steady long enough for the viewer to flinch. He needs someone to flinch in his mockery/respect/admiration game.
Low-ingredient/genuine: In his older films, his actors were raw (either because they weren't actors, or because they were Kinski). Hertzog portrays himself on the scene through his characters, and criticizes himself. The struggles he documents remind him of his own follies. He makes fun of his characters to criticize himself. It's a form of bullying for sure, but it's also a genuine form of self-criticism.
No life lessons: You might walk away thinking "what did i learn from that movie?" Usually you'll have learned nothing (Rescue Dawn might be an exception, because it's really a Hollywood film. But think about his documentary about the skiing wood carver. You learn zero things about skiing or wood carving). But you've walked away with a shitload of feelings. You've been through the ringer. These feelings seem to dissipate soon after the movie, but the sounds, the music, the tone of his voice, the periodic movements in the scene all stay with you. These images have a taste, and you'll remember their taste for years to come.
I hate his movies, but I've watched every one of them to understand why I hate them. I wish kinski had succeeded in strangling him, or that pellet had not be so insignificant, or that Alice Waters had let him choke on that shoe. But there's no escaping the images, I'll always feel haunted.
I find Herzog to be low-key hilarious. Pretty much all my friends, who also dig his work, do as well. I think he tips his hand in this regard quite a bit with Bad Lieutenant 2. Also, notice how when he speaks to live audiences the way he feeds off their laughter and I would argue here is also playing them for laughs in a way a comedian would.
I’m not saying that Herzog is a pure comedic film maker such as Mel Brooks or something but his movies take on a whole new dimension when you realize that yes he is taking a hard look at horror sometimes but I think he also laughs at absurdity quite a bit as well.
Also, his DIY attitude and strong work ethic are admirable qualities as well.
Someone here posted a link to Ebert’s essay on Nosferatu where he goes on about The film’s cinematography (which actually is freakin excellent mind you) and it’s milky under saturated etherealness.. Yeah sure but come on it’s Kinski, who is an absolute nutter, like nutter prime, in a ridiculous vampire costume! Herzog’s humour is underrated.
Another fantastic documentary to see in 3D, in a cinema, was "Pina".
You have dark aspects of protagonists revealed, questions about what to do with belongings if they don't come back and so on. Its not the style that was common at that time. I mean, it gives you perspective on extreme mountaineering and people doing it like few documents do, even in these days.
Whether you like Messner's personality or not, its a damn fine documentary and shows why these guys are not mere athletes like world champions/olympic winners.
as directors go, herzog is wildly uneven. a lot of his stuff strikes me as right on the money, exposing truths i wouldn't have known otherwise. a bunch more of it seems self-indulgent and unnecessary.
having said all that, i'm inclined to watch anything from him i haven't already seen. he's always trying something new.
i would say i value novelty over almost any other quality i might find in movies and teevee. herzog delivers that in spades.