Not the best argument in favour of lens flare to be honest sine it isn't really its presence per se that people object to but its inexplicable overuse. A flare from a light source can be a very cool effect providing there is a explicable origin for said flare (a door opening into a darkened room for example). In Abams case he tends to slap it all over even in scenes featurinig soft and diffused lighting as is the case with the interior of the enterprise, which makes it look like sloppy work by the DP.
So given that, try again.
Okay... Lens flare.The argument of overuse is rather silly to me because it has
no bearing on the characters, story or overall quality of the film as a work of
science fiction. I guess if I were to make an argument for the Lens Flare, it would
be that Lens flare is supposedly proven to stimulate ones optic nerve, triggering
constant stimulation of the pre-frontal cortex. Yes, a theory, perhaps not a sound
one, but one that I like, and one that I am sticking with.
Also, it doesn't bother me at all. It never did! It's not like JJ has gotten in front of
the camera and is brandishing Jar Jar binks in front of me. Outer space in film
whether you like it or not is going to be glamorized. With few exceptions
in the history of film and TV, it always has been! What's wrong with that? I don't see
a problem.