Which areas is film superior to the modern sensors?
- higher dynamic range
- gracefull saturation behavior
and IMHO the absolute killer feature:
- a "fresh" sensor for each and every frame captured (no worries about scratches in the optical lowpass coating, no hassle with dust on the sensor).
Also absolutely no dependency on charged batteries if one uses a purely mechanical camera.
35mm film is considered to have a dynamic range around 13 stops. A modern digital camera will do about 13.9
Film has a few advantages and pleasant quirks over digital, but sensitivity and resolution aren't amongst them.
Digital cameras have been more sensitive than chemical film for some time now, hence I didn't mention sensitivity (film is clearly inferior).
Regarding dynamic range and resolution, it really depends on what kinds of stock you compare to digital. If you take a low sensitivity ISO 50 fine grain stock, that one will easily outperform current generation electronic sensors – except for low-ish resolution high dynamic range sensors with large charge collecting capabilities¹. But you get this at the expense of having to use slow shutter speeds or a fast aperture.
You're right that in the "usual" ballpark of operational parameters (ISO 400 to ISO 2000, ~30MP resolution) modern electronic image sensors are getting close or are on-par with standard application chemical film stock.
----
1: Ironically chemical film stock resolution and dynamic range increase "in the same direction": Smaller grain → higher DR, higher resolution, but lower sensitivity. It's exactly opposite for electronic sensors since pixel size determines charge collection capacity and therefore saturation levels.
Their breakdown is based around top of the line equipment. If you think 50mp can be pulled from film, I'd like to see how.
And as long as you have the negs, you can keep your pictures almost forever. Try reading that fancy RAW, proprietary format from your 2010's camera in 2050.
An early-2000s consumer film camera, addressing roughly the same market as a modern iPhone camera, is not going to have nearly the lens quality, nor will the mass-market film stock have the grain resolution, nor will the 1-hour photo print have the transfer sharpness to survive a scan enlargement to a 1-meter-wide print. The result will look grainy and blurry compared to an enlargement from a recent iPhone.
An early-2000s 35mm SLR with professional film and a high-end darkroom print will look great enlarged, but then an iPhone is no longer an appropriate point of comparison.