We're not stupid. Of course it is totally subjective, and of course it won't look exactly like Kodachrome X, or 25, or 64 or A, or Velvia, or Provia, or Lumiere, or any of the other Ektachrome, Fujichrome, Agfachrome variant shot of the same scene. I doubt that if today we could actually shoot and get processed Kodachrome from the 1930s...1990s it would look like film shot and during those years. Too many things have changed. And of course it will never look exactly like that piece of film scanned. No matter how good the scanner, no matter how high the skill level of the person making the scan, the scan never looks like the original piece of film (often worse, sometimes better.)
If you notice the title of my question asked about the "feel" of those old films not exact duplication. So please, no more straw man arguments.
Films were different from each other, chemical processes were different from each other, and today digital camera systems are different from each other as are digital processing software. High end photography has always been totally subjective - just the same as your vision of what a subject in the real world should look like is going to be different from mine (with the exception of copy work. That should always be as absolutely true to the subject as technically and humanly possible.
