There is no correct view on it, since point of views will be influenced heavily by one's opinion. I personally viewed Rommel as decent military commander due to his proven effectiveness in leading blitzkrieg and apolitical stance. But his reputation is overblown amongst newbies, which opinions shouldn't be taken seriously, as we all knew better.
That being said, many also criticize how he lacks in supplies management skills, provisions for managing prolonged warfare.
And then, there is the bias, since Rommel mostly fought Britain and USA on Western front, which is heavily documented and reported. Meanwhile, all in the eastern front, censorship and the massive scale of death has become common, but the real WW2, if you look at numbers and plot them in charts, happens in the Eastern front. The spilled blood flows like a river there, while all we got from Western front is a nice comprehensive story from each individuals who actually fought there and lived to tell it directly to the public.
And on Hitler:
Every big bad figures are like that. A failed artists turned into soldier and then the leader of mass-murdering regime. Sounds like a story? How about a robber, petty criminal gang, turned into high-ranking politburo member, and then paranoid dictator?
Can you blame the guy if he grew up seeing: a country which fought fair and well, but once asking for armistice, was humiliated to oblivion and turned into rubble. Then there is a country in the east, long forgotten with super poor infrastructure and poor people, yet some of the elites are still acting as if they are ruling their land equally well with those in the West, where people can actually fill their stomach and do a holiday once a year.
Anyway, don't forget that Nazism is also left-leaning. Afterall, they are Nationalist-SOCIALIST. It is just they have slightly different view from Stalin's centralist communism, and much different from Trotsky's international communism.