I like Alan Bloom's translation and commentary. Between the notes and commentary one has a much better chance of understanding the text than with the use of poor translations and second literature that does not hold as fundamental to the art of reading Plato Plato's art of writing.

A few quick comments:

The noble lie is central to the text and operates not just within the city but in the text itself. In other words, Plato is not presenting a philosophical treatise or doctrines or theories. Where they appear they should not be taken at face value. Plato is lying to you - but it is a noble lie, a beneficial lie for both the soul and the city. But behind the lie of truths is the truth of our ignorance of the truth. And so we find elaborate constructs of truth - a realm of Forms known only via noesis, something which Socrates admits he does not know.

Nothing in the dialogues are merely decorative, stylistic, or superfluous. Who says or does what, when and where, and to whom are all important. Socrates spoke to what he saw as the needs of his interlocutors; he uses the analogy of a drug, suitable only when one suffers from a particular illness.

There continues to be a great interest in Plato and an enormous amount of literature being published each year. As with any philosopher, there are various interpretations. As helpful as one might be another might be as harmful. But this hinges on what one hopes to find in the text. A misguided commentary may be beneficial to some readers who are not so much interested in understanding Plato on his own terms as with finding something in the text that is of interest or value or use.