Go watch the movie again. There is such a thing as artistic and appropriate use of technique: in terms of lens flare, DIE HARD is about as far as you'd want to go, and it works just fine. This THING from 09 is lens flare masturbation. The only justification I could imagine would be to hide the art direction from serious view, but with what they spent on that, you'd figure he'd keep it front & center.
As for the credibility of a visual environment, having an all-glare surrounding (and I'm not talking the flares, I'm talking the actual lighting in the sets, especially work areas like the bridge) is the worst notion imaginable, since it interferes with being able to see and react to readings.
I'd put it on par with the idiotic lighting-from-the-floor in parts of TMP, which only makes sense if you do your reading while standing on your head, but the visual aesthetic is even more corrupt here.
And just to sidestep wrongheaded comparison ... it isn't fair to compare any of this with TOS lighting here ... if these guys had to shoot ASA 50 stock for interiors like Finnerman and Francis did, they'd probably have shot themselves instead of dealing with it.
to reiterate: just go rewatch the movie. You don't need to ask for enlightenment (while being sarcastic or dismissive, which is playing to the strengths of some of the other Abrams toadies here), just pay attention.