Harmy said:

STAR WARS was filmed on 35mm film - 35mm film is higher than high definition.

Well we have to compare apples to apples.

You are refering to a 35mm camera NEGATIVE.

Comparing a camera negative to a high definition image is wrong because the negative is not what you see projected on a cinema screen.

If anything you would want to compare a camera negative to the sensor(which captures the image) in a digital camera like the genesis(used for Superman Returns)------ which then down samples this 6K recorded information to output a 1080p signal:

John Galt:Panavision Senior Vice President of Advanced Digital Imaging

"The Genesis would be 6K. Because(it's sensor) has 5760 pixels on one line: 1920 red, 1920 green and 1920 blue."

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels

So a 6k image captured on a digital camera's sensor is easily above the supposed equivalent of a 4k image captured on a 35mm camera negative frame.

So end to end digital is better than 35 mm film.

As it has been scientifically tested and proven that a 35mm interpositive theatrical release print shown in cinemas has/have an average of 700 Line Pairs Per Picture Height(lpph)

Which is well below the resolution of Blu Ray's 1080/24p.

That is the reason why Lucas went digital and chose to shoot the prequels and Red Tails on 1080/24p digital cameras