Just one note on Mpix (I have used them for film developing a lot in the past) - they don't charge for blank or nearly blank frames. So, at least if you really mess up, it will only cost you the wasted film.
The way it works with Mpix is: You request mailers (free - see the link Keith posted). You mail them your film (free). They e-mail you when it's ready, then you log in and pay for it. Once you pay for it, they ship it back to you, and the scans appear in your online album there. You can then order prints/CD of the ones you like. Keep in mind that Mpix only does 35mm C-41 (color negative). No slides, no B&W (other than C-41 B&W), no medium or large format.
Really though, if you're going to shoot film, it would be a good idea to learn to develop it yourself. Not only will you have more control, you will save money in the long run (especially true for B&W).
$7 for a roll of Kodak Gold is extortion.

Yes, that is a common film, but it's not really a good one. You can buy "Pro" film cheaper than that. On average, figure $5 a roll for decent film. You'll save a few bucks buying 5-packs too.
Shooting film isn't really about 'matching' digital. Film has a different look (that a lot of digital shooters like to emulate). It's not really better or worse - just different. I'll leave the film vs. digital debate at that.
If you're just now learning photography, digital may be the more efficient route though... Film is a slower learning process, since you can't see your mistakes right away, and by the time you see them - you may not remember exactly what you did wrong (you should take notes to prevent that).
You can learn photography with film (it was done that way for about the last hundred years), but you'll probably learn faster with digital.
Shooting film is more expensive than shooting digital, but the equipment is far less expensive. You can buy a top-of-the-line 35mm body for a couple hundred. That won't even get you an entry level digital body 3 or 4 generations old. The same lenses can usually be used on either, so that will cost the same which ever way you go. Film cameras are generally built a lot better too (that Rebel you're looking at probably being one of the exceptions though...). I was never impressed by the 35mm Rebel line.