you're missing the point I was trying to make.
1.) Hancock might have been a hit, but no one has any idea who directed that. "Peter Berg" as a name has absolutely no value in terms of putting asses in seats. There are very, VERY few directors with enough recognition to be box office draws (Cameron, Spielberg, Scorcese, Nolan) and Berg is not on this list. His "hit" was entirely due to will smith's star power- and even then it's not regarded as one of smith's better movies.
2.) I haven't seen the film either (neither has most of america- har har) but I HAVE seen trailers. a LOT of trailers. Neeson is barely in them, and isn't given anywhere near top billing. There is at most one "blink and you'll miss it" shot of him speaking into some kind of microphone and looking concerned. Compare that to "Taken" which revolved entirely around his acting chops to draw people in. night and day. The marketing for battleship concentrated on exactly two things- that it was from "the people who brought you transformers" (complete with similar sound effects) and the BATTLESHIP name. It was a strange promotional decision and did not pay off.
This also. Tying BATTLESHIP to a movie about an alien invasion is straight up nonsensical. It would have done better as a WWII or Cold War era military film, rather than...aliens invading from underwater.