Before reading the 2nd book, I had seen it discussed in two ways: 1) just a good as the first or 2) bridge/filler from the first to the third. It didn't take long for me to realize that it definitely #2 for me.
I thought the 2nd book was the weakest of the three, but I liked the 1st one the best. I too am looking forwarding to learning what you think when you read the 3rd one.
I don't know if you ever watched the first three Pirates of the Caribbean films, but Catching Fire felt a lot like Dead Man's Chest which was essentially just a prequel for At World's End not really a sequel to the first film.
That's the best analogy that I can think of at the moment.
I only watched the first two Pirates movies. I really liked the first one, but I can’t remember anything at all about the second one. I vaguely remember people fighting on or around a really big wheel at one point… but I watched the movie when I was completely exhausted, so I don’t think very much of it sunk in. :)
Well, when watching the movie in theaters and you already knew there was going to be a third film coming out the next year it was pretty easy to figure out how the overall narrative and the various subplots would go as they were all setting up for sequel they film simultaneously. They tried to compensate by big action sequences that made the weak narrative elements drag even more.
Anyways, I'm not surprised not much sunk in when you watched it.
That's the best analogy that I can think of at the moment.
Anyways, I'm not surprised not much sunk in when you watched it.