If MFT does all you need of it; stick with it. B-U-T.. there is a lot to say that ignorance is bliss, and a change is as good as a rest. On which basis the 'Lets try Film' suggestion probably has a lot going for it.
You can pick up a 35mm Film-SLR for next to nothing, if not actually 'nothing'; As a bench-mark, an Olympus OM10, is a pretty good starter SLR, and you can pick one up for under £50, with Zioko f1.8 50mm. (Which is probably worth better than half that, on its own!)
There are a lot of cheaper 35mm SLR's, and things like M42 screw fit Zenits, or Pentax K-Fit Practika's; you might pck up for as little as a tenner with lens.Conversely, you can pay a heck of a lot for what were high-end SLR's like the single-digit OM's or Nikon F's. For what they were, they are, these days enormous 'bargains', but they aren't that 'cheap' or that much more useful than stuff lower in the price range.
Late era Auto-Focus are the real steal in the market; they lack the 'classic' manual film camera style and feel; and for a digital-user, not all that 'different' enough; They are probably best avoided for that reason; plus many of those in he sub-£100 range were entry level models, often taking dedicated disposable batteries that are now expensive or unobtainable; and with a lot of mechanics to drive off them, short lived.
Hence bench-marking on the OM10, which as an auto-exposure camera is easy enough to use, but 'filmy' enough to make you feel your getting the real deal... and you possibly already have a couple of lenses intended or it of if not, that Zioko f1.8 would fit rather nicely on the MFT... n
COST of film... err... yeah.... about 5-years ago I bought into Digital SLR, for lack of decent value compacts; tallying up what I have spent the last five years to get an entry level DSLR and the same sort of lens coverage I had for film.... ALMOST as much as I spent on film and processing in twenty years!.. I would say cameras and film, but I actually spent remarkably little on the hardware! Somewhat debunks the myth that 'digital' is cheap, film expensive! Digital is only cheap after you have spent all the money on kit; where per frame, it tends to cheapness, because you can shoot a lot of frames!
Bottom line, like any 'hobby' it will consume as much time and money as you have, and then a bit more....
Practically; film starts at about £1 a roll. Develop & Scan, adds maybe £2 to that. If you shoot Out-Of-Date old stock film, or buy n bulk, you may get the film cost down a tad; If you home develop; you 'might' get the processing cost down a little; and you can save the scanning cost home scanning. Home Process and Scan does beg some set-up cost; but, not a great deal; Basic kit is a dev-tank; the rest cam pretty much be improvides by what you find lying rund the kitchen like old pop bottles and cloths pegs! Scanner? Well, you can buy a cheapo-web-cam-scan, for about £25. They ant great, but they are cheap and easy, and good-enough; So, you could get off to a pretty useful start; camera; lens, five films or so, dev tank, chemicals and scanner, comfortably for around £100.
For that you gt the full-frame experience, and ore critical DoF and focusing, and the 'involvement' of manual cameras, and the after interest of lifting images from the film...
Digital, makes a lot of stuff very easy; film can beg a lot more consideration; Without the set-up costs, it is a very economical way to experience that full-frame perspective and the involvement and diligence needed to get it, and the 'difference' in approach, having to work slower, and working within the limits of the film and the gear to get the most out of it, can be a great training tool. And to a large degree, for a beginner, 'what' camera makes little or no odds; differences between any 35mm SLR will be pretty small in comparison to your ability to exploit it. Better Photographers take better photo's not better cameras!
And Film camera's don't need be that bulky! Curious anomaly of my switch to DSLR's is the bag that used to house two OM bodies, with motor winders, four lenses, a big flash, spare batteries, spare film (a lot of it!), a pack of filters, and a changing bag! NOW is bulging at the seams holding just one, smaller than common, D3200, four lenses and a couple of spare battery packs and a spare SD card! The OM10, was actually one of the most compact 35mm SLR's; without winder or a zoom lens, it's not a 'big' camera, or particularly unwieldy to use.
Warning; shallow DoF effects are a cheap trick of zoom lenses and or fast apertures; but it is easy to get lost chasing razor thin DoF, without appreciating 'selective-focus'; once you appreciate that DoF is a 'zone' of acceptable focus and a % of the set focus distance, you can actually acheve much better 'selective focus' effecs, with manual focus lenses without resorting to wide apertures or telephoto-lenses, simply by NOT being a slave to the red-dots or split-screen, focusing bang on your subject of interest; you can focus in-front of the subject to 'wast' DoF ahead of the subject, and throw the back-ground oof much earlier, without so much zoom, or such a wide aperture. Conversely; you can achieve much greater DoF focusing behind your subject, increasing the focus distance hence the DoF ad getting even more 'effective' FoF putting that 'zone' exactly where you want it in the scene.
Conclusion; I would definitely say that the idea has a lot of merit; and be a very informative exercise, both to to experience an alternative to digital, as well as get a feel for working with a larger format, and the way that alters perspective and DoF. Whilst, it's departure, not a 'change'. An expansion on what you got, not a swap; you don't have to give up the MFT to do it; take it where you will from there. IF it inspires you towards full-frame digital, then could confirm that switch would be a good move. Could inspire you to get more involved with film.. which is possibly no bad thing; or just to stick to what you got. But, expands your experience & expertise for least cost, least risk. Worst case? You stick 35mm camera and lens back on the bay; and you are out of pocket to the tune of a few rolls of film, and better off to the tune of alternate experience gained.
Thunk for you on that one; I cost my hobbies in comparison to a night out... my motorbike for example, costs me approx £500 a year; which I reckon as £10 a week, or half the cost of the pizza after a night to see a band down the local... which itself is half what the bar bill was, and all in, £60 is a 'cheap night out'!!! So if I dd that just once a month, the 'bike' wold still be cheaper! It's certainly cheaper than the £50 a month step-un-son pays for his supposedly 'free-minutes' and 'free Giga-Bytes Data' on his ruddy smart-phone!! By comparison, Digital Camera kit has cost me far more than the motorbike each year over the last few! And Film? £3 a roll, film, process and scan.... 20 films, is STILL less than one night down pub listening to some-one murder metalika, kill the killers, or strangle the stranglers!!!! At least the pizzas assured to be pretty Oh-Kay! Lol.
) recently about the lovely 35mm f1.8 I bought for peanuts that would now cost me twice as much if I could find one 
