I'll be honest - I love the original, but it was a silly concept that's hard to expand upon without acknowledging the ridiculous premise. At the time, people didn't know much about computers, what they could or couldn't do, so you got a lot of movies where computers were basically magic. Tron was a Wizard of Oz knockoff with the premise that a person could be "digitized" and turned into machine code, but in doing so, was transferred to the "world" inside computers where programs took human form - they looked, spoke, and acted like the people who programmed them, engaging in physical combat that mirrorred the video games of the outside world. Nothing about it makes sense or is based in reality. The only thing that would make sense is if it were all a dream or hallucination of Flynn's.
The visuals were the primary reason we enjoyed the movie. It had a basic plot (again, just The Wizard of Oz) and a lot of action in a fantastic sci-fi setting. I still enjoyed the sequel, which had the same plot but with a twist on the villain/hero being the same person, and updated visuals. The short-lived animated series was also enjoyable.
But, as such, I don't have high expectations for Ares. It's based on a concept that is inherently flawed, so you can't do a lot to change it to make it less flawed. And Jared Leto overacts in everything, which people mistake for good acting. I think the whole "method acting" for him is a gimmick, something that gets attention in the press for his off-screen antics. It can also be a crutch - some actors utilize it better than others, but I think actors use it because they can't "switch it on and off," so to speak. It's easier for them to stay in character all the time than to return to being themselves when the cameras aren't rolling. Really good actors can flip that switch and become the character when it counts and stop when the cameras stop. Just my two cents.
