People really like the color profile of film, not the hyperrealistic/vibrant photos that a lot of cameras are making today. Especially for portraits and wedding photography. I have a Fujifilm with built in color profiles that are really nice.
Yeah, I can't do astrophotography very well, but my shots on film are a lot more considered.
After a while you can pre-guess the exposure settings for a particular shot before even looking through the viewfinder, but point the camera a few degrees to the side and you have to reset your exposure for the new lighting.
It's frustrating for the first few years and initially you'll miss many shots but when you nail The Shot you feel that you really 'own' it because everything leading to it was your decision.
Eventually it becomes second-nature and you'll be spinning the settings dials without conscious effort.
I took a shot of a vibrant orange car and imported it into Lightroom. The "embedded preview" looked way better than the Lightroom rendering. Even after half an hour of fiddling, I couldn't get the orange of the car to have both the saturation, the saturation dynamic range, and the metallic "3D look" that the Fuji preview had. And this is disregarding the balance of the rest of the scene (which also looked better on the Fuji). I ended up giving up and using Lightroom's Fuji color mode.
To be clear, we've only reached the point of parity in photography and film in the last few years and only then with expensive, state of the art equipment. It's not yet possible to achieve the dynamic range of good analog with today's mobile phones or mid-range DSLRs. Just for starters you need to capture more than 14 stops of dynamic range which is still only found at the extreme high-end of digital. Even when you've digitally sampled the photons with sufficient fidelity, it requires quite a bit of skill to process it appropriately.