I'll always wonder why Hollywood could waste talent when given opportunities so golden. The raw talents of much of the cast here was completely undercut by an abbreviated, romanticized script only faintly resembling historical events. Audie Murphy, so young in this case, significantly outperforms the cheesy part he's given, sometimes acting profoundly with just his eyes and body language. His trademark speech patterns, recognizable in much of his other work in my opinion ranks equal with Gregory Peck in terms of depth and sincerity. Other young actors rise to meet his level acting above the quality of the thin and barely cohesive plot.
Secondly, the director of photography deserves praise for skill and editing, but the studio gets raspberries for location. I've been to Kansas enough times to know the erratic boulder, pine, and fir strewn mountain ridges seen in this "kansas" are nowhere in reality. California is diverse enough to provide ample locations and, I know politics and money rule, but why the heck couldn't the Central Valley be considered? With the obvious well-endowed budget this film got it just appears the studio assumes its audience was too stupid to know better at the time. I hope not.
As commented by others, it's regrettable that the writers forfeited an opportunity to correctly document a basic record of the Quantrill gang and its opportunistic co-opting of the Civil War for its own gain. Inventing the early conversion of an idealistic and noble Jesse James and gang and making a fictional romance the focus of the story seems consistent with how Hollywood made money then and to a larges extent, now.
By comparison, it's a tightly edited, almost too-well edited movie. I wished some things were better developed. But, it's not dopey like so many from the period. And, the photography, as un-Kansan as it is, is beautiful.