It's a nice enough video but conceptually shallow. If they'd had me on the production team I would have insisted the challenge is not merely about film or the "look". More is a stake.
Film is a common option in photography but not really at the heart of things. Hey, some people expose paper in a camera. Others do wet-plate. The unique and decisive thing about photography is the making of pictures out of light sensitive materials. Platinotypes, ambrotypes, gelatin-silver pictures...the list goes on... are just as much part of photography as exposing film. Without this insistence we may end up with people taking digital pictures of photographs (by camera or scanner) and displaying the re-calculated digital results as photographs. That's a deceit I won't buy if I'm going to stand up for photography.
As for the "look", what happens when electronic picture making can replicate exactly the appearance (just the appearance not the substance) of a photograph? Do I abandon photography and it's special physical and causal relationship to subject matter? No way! I'm not going to buy "looks like means same as" and go through life as an eternal patsy.