mmm i'm disagree about most of these statements about film vs digital.
probably are real since 5-6 years ago... but now...
if you show me a film strip where you recover 4-5 stop in burned highlights i will happy to see, from since 25 years that i shoot in film...
With film you expose to the right (ettr) like you must do in digital, if you expose digital cinema camera like video camera, you obtain video picture.
This statements is not mine, but i learned from an old (84 years) DoP that teach me like to expose and work correctly with film, and later with digital. He told me : it's only a matter of media, i found a new kind of emulsion, well i test it, i found its limits, i push the picture around these limits. And he did the same with digital.
actually a good digital vs good film offer same opportunity, if not... change your dit and / or your cameras.
Especially where you told that digital is better than film about dark areas... digital sensors lack especially in shadow, where if you not expose correctly you grab so garbage instead of film, where you can grab some dectails or grain.

an old dop (74 years ols) that teach me how to work fine in digital told me is only matter of knowledge, if you work with film you must know correct rules of work, if you shoot in digital you must know different rules, but the dop work is the same... he remembered same debacle when there was change from old three strip developing against technicolor and more...
@ninjaMonkey, if you think to rescan an actual 35mm film in 12k in future probably you never scan a negative...
today you can scan better (not 4k) 2001 only be cause it was shooted with good strip, a lot of vfx are shooted with 65mm vistavision, a special horizontal format developed to shoot vfx only, be cause too expansive to use for shooting live.
35mm strip have a line / inch recording capability and is not magical, you cannot scan a 35mm at 12k if info is not inside recorded... you can probably recover more infos from an Imax or 70mm like BenHur, and similar.
film vs digital, like you cannot do a good shooting with 8mm, you cannot do a good shooting from a cheap digital camera.
i'm first to tell that there is digital and digital, someone that too similar to video, someone that mimic the sensibility of film, the curve of sensibility on shadow and light, the gentle roll off of the light of sun in the sky.
too much movies are advertised from hardware used and not from story...
if you note that a movie is shooted in film or digital, don't waste your time about it, but ask what in the story of movie don't work enought that you be distracted from a trivial dectail like shooting in digital or film.

ps 28 day later was a artist choose to do a different shooting with dvcam, not higher quality for all film, with exception of last shot, film, to show green of good end.
about star wars, ep. 1,2,... too immature tech, and i'm totally agree with you, i hate the photography of these movies, too similar to a videogames, no dof, strange gamma, color over saturated in wrong way...

actually i focus on 9' display 1024x600 for 4k camera.
good and sharp, with focus peaking allow me to work well on focus.
i'm going to see VA from blackmagic, 5' fullHd, but if i cannot try it... i don't know if my eyes can see correctly on smaller display with smaller pixel a real focus. :-D

nippon kogaku 85mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4, better 1.2/35mm 2.0/24mm 2.8 (2.0 you risk to find some lenses with strange coating).
if you are luck you can find all under 800 $, but you must also add since 80$ for lenses to buy bayonet change from nikon to x.
i bought from leitax.com bayonet changes for all nikons. You unmount screw from rear lens, remove nikon bayonet, add leitax bayonet, mount again screws. Now you have a xx mount solid and perfect. don't waste your time on adapter ring when you can buy for same money solid bayonet mount.
here some frame extract from shooting 85mm 1.8 on s35 sensor of Blackmagic Production Camera4K
https://www.behance.net/gallery/24987295/Old-Meet-New

BMPC 4k
i used BMCC 2.5k for a full lenght feature movie, nice product, but actually i bought a BMPC4k some follow reason :
- bmpc4k vs bmcc dinamic is since one stop, on dark side, not so usable when you compare side by side
- bmpc 4k mean s35 global shutter sensor, less crop on both EF mount.
- choose EF be cause is active mount, where you need stabilization, you can have. m4/3 of bmc is passive mount, not good like gh2/3/4 (i owned them, different beast)
- bmpc4k mean you can shoot excellent prores 4k-fullHD, 4k raw gorgous
- bmpc4k mean you can extract 8.9 mpx photo set raw from shooting

bmcc mean s16 sensor with EF active fullframe mount or mft passive, or you search old s16 lenses (angenieu produce excellent lenses zoom and prime, zeiss also), or you work with large crop cut and very video aspect ...
for video aspect i mean you need tokina 11-16 to have a lens that have focal angle of 35-50mm but when you shoot a face, 16mm is so far to be a normal lens.
battery... bmc don't have production battery, olny switch battery like pro cameras.

if you compare directly bmcc bmpc4k you cannot find so big picture difference about dinamic gamma, we mix in different production without problems, but bmcc is a camera that must used only with s16mm lenses to express the best of .

Other info bmpc4 mean 4k, ultraHD, HD. BMCC mean 2.5k only raw, HD only prores.
with bmpc 4k you can have larger choose of format. Also worst ultraHD prores proxy scaled is better than HD of 2.5k

Problems about ... what?
i have many nippon kogaku lenses, and i used indifocus rings until i build myself a custom rings to optimize my bmpc4k setup, all same very large rings, to avoid follow focus adjustment, and builded around to dented focus ring of these amazing lenses.
let me know you dubs.