This question seems a little outside APUG’s intended subject matter, so I’ll try to answer briefly. Digital processing of a film original frees you from the more-or-less fixed relationship between the original and the print. This means that the characteristics of colour film are much less important when using digital processing than using traditional methods. Colour response and accuracy, saturation, graininess, sharpness and contrast are all easily controllable during digital post-processing.
Ten or so years ago EK produced a colour negative motion picture film (‘Primetime’, EI 640) that could not be printed traditionally with any degree of colour accuracy – it could only be viewed as video (or printed via a digital intermediate). That was an excellent example of the decoupling of the response curves of the original from those of the ‘print’, and of the visual character of the image being largely determined during post-processing. Where you place the exposure on the film in relation to the film’s response curve still matters, of course, as does the film’s ability to record the scene brightness range in the first place.
As I mentioned in my reply to Nicole’s question, Kodak Ultra 100 is one of my favourite films for landscape. It has very low graininess, can cope with around 13 stops of scene brightness range, and it is capable of giving accurate colours with normal saturation. I scan and print all my own work, and do the same custom work for a few other photographers