Not too much, honestly. The movie kept me engaged and interested in what was going on, which is more important in the moment than whether the plot falls apart on deeper analysis. The editing and compositions do a good job of selling visual continuity through scenes even when logical continuity starts to fail, and the pacing is good enough that it doesn't linger too long at the points where the plot is going off the rails to allow for in-the-moment examination.
That's how writing tends to go: you don't notice what's wrong with it as long as everything is working in a holistic sense. It's mostly when your editing becomes herky-jerky and the viewer's left blinking and wondering what happened--or when the pacing is either so glacial that the audience has time to overthink a scene's finer points or doesn't get time to really understand what's happening at all--that the flaws in a story truly become painfully apparent.
That said, it is weaker in all of these aspects than the previous movie, which also has some real logical inadequacies in the story but covers them expertly with the film-making.