Yeah, I'm kind of wondering why anyone would compare this unlubed fisting of comedy to a holiday classic directed by Frank Capra and starring Jimmy Stewart.
--------------------- Why not phone up Robin Hood, And ask him for some wealth distribution?
A film falling into the public domain doesn't necessarily change a film's reputation. It simply means that since there is no copyright attached to it, it can be distributed without paying the studio. Television networks can play the film for free, home video companies can distribute it for free, and the entire movie can be posted on the Internet without the studio's permission. It can even be altered without consent from the production company. This is why "It's a Wonderful Life" was rediscovered years later: because it was free!
In fact, "Life" was loved by audiences and critics when it came out; it was even nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. The reason the film did so poorly at the box office had little to do with its quality (it was expensive, competition with other films, etc.). Not all good films do well commercially.
On the other hand, "North" flopped BECAUSE of its quality. Critics trashed it, and audiences stayed away.
Plus, copyright law has changed since then. Originally a copyright was good for 28 years, then it had to be renewed to keep it from expiring. Now, "North" will probably enter the public domain when we're all dead.
However, if the copyright on "North" does expire, and the film does become widely available again, will its reputation change? That, unfortunately, cannot be explained.