For me what made it clicked is realizing that complex numbers are 2D matrices: z = x + i y = [[x -y][y x]].

So really we should be writing z = x * [[1 0][0 1]] + y * [[0 -1][1 0]], but since it's tedious we just call 1 == [[1 0] [0 1]] the 2x2 identity matrix and i == [[0 -1][1 0]], and check that i^2 = -1.

Then no more magical i number, the complex product can be derived from the matrix product, the exponential becomes the 2x2 matrix exponential, and so on.

Using a matrix as an exponent isn't any more comprehensible than an imaginary number to me. If it works for you, that's great, but it's not much help to me.

Think of exponentiation of some number 'a' as in-between its integer powers: 'a^1.5' is kind-of half-way between 'a' and 'a^2'.

If you plot all the integer powers of 'a', they all belong to a curve and the exponential simply fills-in the gaps for non-integer exponents.

Now, there are many possible ways to fill the gaps but the exponential does it so that a^m * a^n = a^{m+n} holds even for non-integer numbers m and n.

Similarly, if you take integer powers of a complex number, they all lie on some curve and the exponential fills-in the gaps, again turning sums into products. The same works with matrices, and so on.

Here, http://www.shapeoperator.com/2016/12/12/sunset-geometry/

http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf/OerstedMedalLecture.pdf

http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf/GrassmannsVision.pdf