The rhyming is juvenile, and not because it's trying to be juvenile. It runs into the problem of struggling really hard to fit itself together and makes some of the most terrible rhymes ever and some that aren't even rhymes (breast/death, filled/chill) but are consonant enough that they could be gotten away with if the rest of the poem didn't rhyme so ardently. It's like wearing too much makeup, it's just so preposterous there's no reason for it to be taken seriously. Sometimes that's a good thing if the subject is trying to be a clown and explain some dramatic fault or comedic irony, but is not desirable for serious storytelling.
Since there's no other formatting to guide the reader besides the couplets and the stanzas associated to each character it almost beckons the reader to acknowledged how ridiculous the rhyming is and how primitive the whole focus is.
There is no rhythm to speak of, not a lot of literary description and usage, and not a lot of symbolism or metaphor to develop the characters, just a stream of facts and cliches used to describe them. It walks a line between being narrative and poetry because of how arhythmic it is but how crude the writing is to be considered descriptive narrative.
To steal a phrase "show instead of tell". A common film criticism is that the director doesn't leave anything to the audience and removes all subtlety because they're afraid their stupid viewers will miss something. In this case, there is so much incessant description and explanation that the poem doesn't communicate anything emotionally. It possesses the literary quality of a shopping list that way.