I finally got around to watching "The Hunger Games" last week, and when I went to read the Wikipedia entry for the film, I saw that the production schedule was so tight, that they elected to shoot on real film, as a time-saving measure, because they knew digital would likely take more time in post.
I'm actually kind of doing both at the same time now, with two concurrent projects. One is a Super 8-originated 20-minute accompanying film for a set of 8 songs, and the other is a longer thing that will be made with HD webcams and HDV camcorders. The short will cost $2k for film stock, processing and HD scanning (if I'm lucky enough to stay within a 3:1 ratio for useful footage out of 60 minutes of film stock), and the digital thing will cost literally next to nothing. Neither will be made with full crews of paid professionals, mind you, and we're not talking major studio releases, by any stretch, just two things I want to do as an artist/hack.
I sure hope real film stays with us for some years to come, because there's much more I want to do with it before I get much older. At the same time, different projects might call for different approaches. For example, I'm looking forward to seeing "Computer Chess," which was mostly shot in black and white with 1970's video cameras.