I've found looking at figures and captions to be really misleading. I find that I have to read the methods section first to convince myself that the data collection was correct before I can trust any figures.
You have to read the abstract. It's the intro and conclusion you can skip.
I've heard arguments that one should leave the abstract until the end, since it sometimes pushes a story harder than the data necessarily warrants, and so if you come to your own conclusion about what's going on in the paper, then check to make sure the authors claim what you feel is supported, you're less likely to be misled. Probably this makes sense for reviewing a paper, but for most things, I'd rather find out quickly if the paper is even relevant to what I'm working on.