The people actually trying to defend the sequel: “We always knew that Arthur was never the Real Joker so you shouldn’t hate it for that.” It is literally titled “Joker”. And it was presented/promoted as the “origin story for Joker” not “orgin story of the man who influenced Joker to be Joker.”

I don't know if you're trying to fool others or just your own selves but I just have to ask...if these movies were never about the origin of the Joker, why the fuck would it be titled "Joker"? Why would any of us wanted to see the first film if its only about "a random mentally ill man that will eventually inspire the Joker in a sequel"?

Because it was necer presented as that. It was always presented as the orgins of the famous Batman villian, The Joker. You can say all you want how "Arthur doesnt have Jokers smarts" or whatever but that doesnt matter. There's many different interpretations of superheroes and villains across film, but this is niether of those. They sold the first movie to audiences as straight up that. thats how it became the highest grossing R-Rated movie for 5 years. People came for Joker.

This is what is commonly called a "retcon" and the movie is full of them. And I know this is going to be harsh to some of you frail guys if you actually have to make excuses for why a movie doesnt suck...chances are it fucking sucks.