Michael Griffiths said:
The difference is that back when U2 first started out - and well into the 80s and early 90s - the hits came about because the songs arrived due to trusting the outcome, and most importantly, by letting go. The songs were almost gifts. Llike U2 was simply the vehicle in which to harness the song. Now, it's almost like they want to build the song themselves. Like they have an agenda when it comes to the writing process.
That doesn't mean I don't like the last two albums. It's just a totally different approach, I feel. It's more structured, more focused, and more disciplined, I'm sure. But the real magic always came when they let go and surrendered to something other.
The songs still arrive, the difference is just that, naturally, U2 got better at songwriting, the craft of it. This is not to say there aren't any good songs on the last two albums.
I think that for all the marketing, for all the TV shows they did (it's one thing to go out there when you're about 30, but completely different when you're 40+), they have very little hits this decade. Which is why I think this is, much as I like the ambition to be out there and to compete with the radio's "usual suspects", in the end not worth the trouble. They are too "old" for the US. (they have more hits ROW, Europe in particular)