Not entirely sure how you came to that conclusion if I'm honest!
Quality, longevity, price, resolving power, depth of field, depth of focus, colour balance, contrast ratio......
Film sees in exactly the same way as the human eye does, digital doesn't. This is what I do for a living. Whenever I work with digital now (which is mercifully still fairly rare), we are asked to make it look like film. Nobody likes the look or feel of raw digital footage, a LUT is always applied to make it look like a particular film stock. The only benefits of digital are in the point and shoot markets. Be it press photography or amateur who are not interested in processing or understanding how their camera works. This is a way for someone at home to get selective printing and a way for a press photographer to shoot a huge amount of photos and get them directly into print. Anyone with a darkroom could already print selectively (and sell back their own silver too) so that benefit is irrelevant. I do enjoy being able to snap a preview shot when I'm out with my DSLR but to be honest it gets me nothing that bracketing can't. Do you know that this is pretty much the only country in the world where there is more or less a conspiracy to force us to go digital? In the US and in Japan there is still a huge market for film because people appreciate that they are two different imaging processes. We were truly betrayed here when our largest high street photographic chain decided that film was dead.