Ryan Reynolds is not a leading man

I am so sick of new movies that perpetuate the myth that Ryan Reynolds is a leading man.  He is a snarky sidekick providing a wealth of comic relief in such action movies as X-Men:  Wolverine Edition starring Hugh Jackman's Mutton Chops and That Shoot'Em-Up Movie Where Jeremy Piven Is A Magician And Common Is There Too.  Post-Van Wilder, however, his lead roles have left something to be desired.  I get a really uncomfortable feeling when I see him onscreen not dropping a snide little snark-bomb.  I just think, who does this guy think he is being serious/romantic/sweaty?  It's like a Pavlovian dog at a hand-bell concert - where's my kibble, Ryan?  You can't just show in a movie, after snarking your way into Hollywood, and expect me to be cool with your new persona.  I need to be eased into such a radically different cinematic experience.  While you were trapped in a box for two and half hours, my little trained brain kept waiting for "Real original, guys!  What, were they out of shark tanks at the Cliche-Ways-To-Kill-People store?"  Just kidding, of course I didn't see that movie.  I have a strict policy against situational action movies - those kind of scenario-inspired totally unrealistic watered-down pseudo-thrillers written by some dude, on his bong-scented couch, like GOT IT, what if there's this like this normal guy, just livin' his life, and ends up in a telephone booth/on a ledge/kidnapped by a security guard/mortally dependent on a cellphone. 

I don't mean to be bitchy.  You are an actor, and you probably have more skillz than I realize, but you were unfortunately pigeonholed into a character from whom you may never escape.  Additionally, I consider you lacking in qualities I expect in a leading man.  The formula is pretty rigid.

1)  People need to want to make out with a leading man.  Desperately.  Generally speaking, the best leading men have had luscious, kissable lips, preferably paired with a strong jaw so as to prominently display the clenching required of leading men during emotionally or physically taxing scenes.

TMJ is a serious disease.

2)  Leading men must possess a measure of unpredictability, danger, and energy that seems at times out of control.  Ryan, you are too nice.  I could easily picture you sitting in my living room, munching on some popcorn, offering to take my mom to the airport tomorrow 'cause it's no problem.  I don't slightly fear you, and therefore, how can I be attracted you in an action-movie setting?

This guy could punch anyone in the face, at any time, and not even care.  "Charisma."

3)  Maybe this is a personal issue, but Ryan just has that "gym body."  Like, clearly he didn't acquire those muscles just by livin' his bad ass life.  Everything is puffy and shiny and hairless and symmetrical.  It's just so unnatural. 

 A leading man, by contrast, should not care about his appearance enough to go to the gym like a proud peacock - he requires his muscular physique for the demanding tasks he must accomplish within the 2.5 hour allotment (rescue wife, round-house kick, run from explosions, barely dodge gunfire).

 "What's that?  I look good?  THERE'S NO TIME!"

It's not just Ryan.  Jake Gyllenhall, Orlando Bloom, Shia LeBoeuf, Zac Efron, Ryan Phillipe, Seann William Scott, and ol' Tobey "Babyface" Maguire - I never bought, and will never buy, any of these guys as leading men.  Of course, bad-ass-ness always changes that.  Leo DiCaprio could have disappeared into teen-heartthrob obscurity, but he helped himself out by looking kind of f*cked up all the time.  Robert Downey Jr. got into drugs, as did Colin Farrell - it's sad, but that does add the danger factor.  Not that I encourage it, I'm just using it as an example.  Everyone loves a comeback, that's all I'm saying.  Robert Pattinson might just save himself by keeping up the brooding, slightly-nauseous crazy-eyed public persona he's been cultivating.  There's hope for you, yet, Reynolds.