I like full front movements for landscape and architecture, and the rear movements I'm usually using when I want indirect movements, because I've exceeded what I can do on the front standard alone. I don't usually like the exaggeration of the near/far relationship, for instance, that you can get with rear tilt/swing (though you can also use it in the opposite way of course).
Shifts are really useful for interiors, say when you want to look straight down a hallway, but you don't want to put the hallway in the center of the frame. Sometimes they are handy for landscapes in the same way. For instance, say you are photographing a field of mown hay. If you stand in the middle of the field with the lens centered, looking down the parallel rows, they will radiate out from the center of the bottom of the frame. But maybe the clouds or landmarks in the scene would work better if the parallel rows were to radiate from a corner of the frame--you could walk to the edge of the field and shift in the opposite direction to reframe.
Rear rise, fall, and shift are more important for macro and tabletop photography, where moving the front standard will create a more dramatic change in perspective.