Not particularly.
The exact sequence for an engine start can be affected by many things. East coast USA in particular, is very busy, and getting things out of the way, so that they aren’t done sitting on, and blocking, a taxiway may be useful.
It was quite common flying into JFK to be descended quite early, and to then do a tour of the state at a few thousand feet. Not very efficient from our point of view, but given the multiplicity of airports in close proximity, with approach and departure paths winding through each other, not surprising. Added to that is the general US controller habit of getting aircraft to maintain higher than usual speeds (and then being quite narky if you tell them you want to slow) and you can often end up with more energy than you ideally want at any given point on the approach. The landing gear is a very effective speed brake. If you look at QF93 and 11 arrivals into LA, the gear is often taken very early on right base, and is often out of ‘sequence’. You simply need extra drag, and the gear provides lots of it. At the 200 knots or so that you’re doing at that point, the speed brakes are relatively ineffective.
The flaps would not have been selected in one hit. Each stage would have been selected below its limiting speed. So, whilst the selection would have been 1, 2, 3, full, with a gap between each selection, they don’t instantly arrive at each position, so the actual run could have been more or less continuous.