I realise that analog is what is keeping Kodak afloat, much of what is keeping that afloat is the fact Hollywood has up until now, used most of the massive amounts of production capacity, to make analog prints. Many productions now are shot on film, scanned, a lot of the editing and special effects are added digitally, it's then printed onto negative film, processed and that is used to produce the prints. Film distributors spend a lot of money producing those prints and shipping them around. not only can they be fairly heavy, but they need secure shipping, which is also expensive. With digital, you can dump the entire feature onto a DVD size disc, drop it into a padded envelop pop that into a flat rate FedEx mailer, and ring up FedEx to pick it up and deliver it. Especially if it's in an encrypted format, with a key-ring type encryption, where you use one key to encrypt, another to decrypt.
I think Kodak should have gone down the same road Ilford did, concentrate on it's core business of analog photography. They got into consumer digital after other companies already owned the market, and like many other computer products, if your not the latest and greatest your dead meat. Kodak has or at least had enough smart people at the R&D level that they could have produced a lower volume film production process, especially after a decade of shrinking market.