Perhaps the "filmic" mode has some other advantages, but in the comparison above the one more saturated look less realistic.
This isn't valid comparison, the tonemapping is
not meant as post-production. It is a highlight compression algorithm merely to go from linear, mathematical space. You still can do (and should do) desaturation afterwards if it's creative choice, and it will look more correct, than if the Reinhard, selectively desaturated your blacks and you would have to retrieve them. There is big difference to this.
The filmic, doesn't dictate the end look. It just corrects the faulty behavior Reinhard has.
The examples by Karamox looks more 3D ish because the vegetation has completely wrong materials to start with, this just how 3D foliage packages are setup. With overbright, oversaturated albedo values because no one knows better. PBR might exist, but Evermotion is still in 2002..
Filmic does absolutely not contribute to more CGI-sh look, it's something very decoupled from this. All it does is better simulate camera response so that we can move into our post-production from better set values. Filmic is to Reinhard what Linear workflow was to gamma incorrect workflow of pre-2000. It's not artistic/creative feature alone, it's technical.
Filmic doesn't saturate anything by default (it has 5 controls, and the 'toe' gives contrast to blacks, which, can rise saturation), by it can correctly retain. There are definitely physically wrong tonemappers like HSW which saturate highlights, but filmic isn't.
Does the world loose contrast and saturation in your eyes when you step outside :- ) ?