I am, once again, not an expert, but I cannot imagine how film couldn't be faster. You're opening the shutter for the same amount of time (assuming the same film/sensor speed), but the film records that data directly due to the photons affecting the chemicals on the film, whereas the sensor has to do the same thing, plus pass that information on to a bunch of electronics, which in turn do more processing.

However, there are really at least two questions here. The one I just answered is "how long does it take the camera to record an image?". The next is "would the image I captured be the same between these two cameras?". I think the answer there is "yes". I don't see any great reason why there would be a significant amount of difference between the time you press the shutter button and the shutter actually opens, and I've already pointed out that the shutter is open for the same amount of time. Since neither camera can record images at any time when the shutter isn't open, that would seem to indicate that they'd be taking the same photo.

(Actually, there might be an electronic delay on the digital camera, as it might have to tell the sensor and related electronics to get ready, while the film is always ready. That said, I imagine that mechanical linkages would make that delay irrelevant.)

Then there's another question, which is "how much longer until I can take another photo?". I'd imagine that the digital could come out ahead here, as it doesn't have to wait for the physical movement of a piece of film. There are probably other factors that are more relevant, though.