Why the b-grade support for Cruise this time?

The first Jack Reacher film had Christopher McQuarrie writing and directing, and acting alongside Tom Cruise were Rosamund Pike, David Oyelowo and Richard Jenkins. Even Jai Courtney did his part well and casting Werner Herzog as Zec was inspired.

Cut to the sequel and I really wish they had never gone back! Ed Zwick is now directing, who once made The Last Samurai which was great but that was a very different film and he's made a lot of insipid films since then. This time, instead of the lovely Rosamund Pike, we get the C-grade Canadian version in Cobie Smulders. We also get a C-grade villain in Robert Knepper, the man whose acting is so one-note, it's a shame anyone still gives him work. Oh and we get an annoying 15-year-old girl who looks 20.

With Never Go Back, we also get the bare threads of a plot and no real mystery. The whole film is Reacher and the two female characters running from the bad guys. That's the whole film. Every now and then, someone will explain why they're running and what's going on but they feel ceremonial. They're running, and that's kinda boring, then there are some explanations which are really boring so you hope something actually happens.

It it absolutely unwatchable? No. If you have nothing better to do on a night you're staying in, then by all means try it out. It will be massively disappointing but it could be better than nothing. Thing is, the first Jack Reacher didn't aim for the 'better than nothing' standard, so I'm very curious why this one was made to that standard?