Still, we have half as many projectors as we have states in this country. Also, a lot of people just don't like the aspect ratio changes. I'm not gonna try to convince any of you otherwise.
That said, I would press everyone to at least see it on film.
One of the drawbacks of film projection in history is the analog nature. If you have to make thousands of prints for a wide release, you have to make copies of copies of copies and the images degrade with each generation. Digital copies don't degrade.
One of great things about digital projection becoming standard is that there are fewer film prints, which means that they're being made from internegatives much closer to the original camera negative.
Even if you just opt for a 35mm screening, you're gonna be seeing a better image than any digital showing. It will be more faithful to the filmmakers vision. It will be of higher resolution. Especially in regard to a movie that didn't take a digital intermediate step, you're seeing a more faithful image. What's more, you'll actually have a projectionist who knows what he or she is doing quality checking the show rather than just leaving it to automaton and a minimum wage employee who is gonna get called to the concession stand if it gets busy.
Bottom line, movies that are made like this only come by every-so-often. Even most directors who shoot on film use a digital intermediate. Tarantino is one of the few filmmakers left aside from Nolan who at least tries to avoid a DI. Paul Thomas Anderson is another one. Still, they're a dying breed. It's important to keep this alive.