Stephen Halliwell has a beautifully crafted review in NDPR (read it here) of Radcliffe G. Edmonds III, Myths of the Underworld Journey: Plato, Aristophanes and the 'Orphic' Gold Tablets, Cambridge University Press, 2004, which relates inscriptions on the gold funerary 'leaves' or 'tablets' (lamellae) found in some ancient Greek graves to Aristophanes' Frogs and the myth in the Phaedo. As to the latter, Halliwell confesses (in a manner which will appeal to some readers of Dissoi Blogoi):
But surely we can allow that the dialogue has 'dramatic complexity and subtlety' without also having to say, as is commonly said, but which seems false, that 'Socrates never convinces his companions'.
My one disappointment, however, is that while adopting such a sophisticated approach to the intricacies of Platonic mythopoeia, and after acknowledging the 'many levels' on which the dialogues can be read (161-2), Edmonds tends to lapse into a rather narrowly conventional view of what constitutes the Phaedo's 'communication between the absent author . . . and his audience' (161), talking repeatedly of arguments, reasons, and convictions espoused by Socrates in the work as though they could be straightforwardly identified as Plato's own (he can even speak of 'Plato's theories [sic] of punishment', 217 n. 177) and as though its philosophical conclusions were never in doubt. But this seems to underestimate the dramatic complexity and subtlety of the Phaedo, in which, for all his eloquence and fervour, Socrates never decisively convinces his companions to share his attitude to death.
The strong and clever reasoner, Cebes, says at 107a2 "[F]or my part I've no further objection, nor can I doubt the arguments at any point" (Waterfield, ou)/koun e)/gwge... e)/xw para\ tau=ta a)/llo ti le/gein ou)de/ ph| a)pistei=n toi=j lo/goij), to which weak-minded Simmias agrees, "nor have I any further ground for doubt myself, as far as the arguments go" (ou)d' au)to\j e)/xw e)/ti o(/ph| a)pistw= e)/k ge tw=n legome/nwn, although admittedly Socrates at b5-10 recognizes that he might need some shoring up).
I'm not able to doubt your arguments in any respect. I have no grounds for doubting your arguments. --It's a little too much subtlety, I'd say, to convert a dialogue which ends with as firm an expression of conviction as one could wish, into one in which no one gets 'decisively convinced.'