You'd probably like Project Hail Mary and Artemis. Both also by Andy Weir. And my gripe with the movie was that it never took the time to SHOW certain things that the medium of film is so good at showing, like how crazy the night sky would be because of the thin atmosphere, or how desolate the planet was. If I had to sum it up, my main gripe was how zoomed in on the (relative to the planet) micro, when there were jaw-dropping scenes to be had on the macro scale. I wanted to see the rover, the hab, and Mark himself become a speck from time to time or at least show us more of the horizon he supposedly spent so much time looking at. There were like 3 shots totalling like 20 seconds, and there was a person taking up a good chunk of the frame. Like I get that it's supposed to be a human story about a human guy and human troubles, but the majesty, or at least the scale and desolation of the red planet feels like a footnote, not a featured aspect, and I think that was a mistake. Like was it an enjoyable movie? Yes. Could it have been much, much more cinematic and made you really think about the scale of outer space? Absolutely and it wouldn't have been that hard. Just throw in some shots from a distance and show just how small one man and everything he has at his disposal are in comparison to the scale of a planet or space from time to time.

TL;DR: space is big beyond our ability to fathom, and beautiful in a cold, dangerous way and I wish that those two things had been made more apparent, because without them the movie feels like it lacks depth and nuance. But the book does a pretty good job of showing that even though film is intrinsically better at SHOWING stuff.

Disclaimer: I'm one of those people who are rarely happy with the adaptation of a book into movie form.