It did not bother me, because the first book never bored me even though the intrigue isn't much connected to the core of the trilogy. It's a more typical scandinavian thriller, and I'm a fan of those (Jo Nesbo in particular lately). It's one of the critics I've seen a lot about the trilogy, that book one is like a long prologue, and the "main story" is a bit irrelevant to the other two (the "background stuff" is what's important to pay attention to). A common but fairly minor quibble, because on the francophone market the trilogy was a smash hit with critics and readers (the French and Québécois have long been huge fans of Scandinavian thrillers). It's well received in English, but in many countries in Europe and in French Canada the books (all three released at once) and the movies became a phenomenon in the vein of Dan Brown... except unlike Brown the critics too were raving.