It’s probably an allusion… I hope.
@SteveAdamo, what did you search into Google Images? “Giant Pile of Salt With Conveyer Belt Labelled”?
nope, thats an actual salt pile, “unloaded from the Algosteel for the long Wisconsin winter ahead”…
i searched for “massive salt rock”, found this image… and with the powers of the interwebs, transformed it into the lovely attachment above… 
2 Likes
I don’t disagree with your point, but as someone who works in that particular industry, I’ll bet you cash
money that what happened is this: the writer’s, who are - by and large, gamers and geeks - wrote the
reference correctly.
Then, on set, the actors, who are - by and large, uh… not - read the script and start making a lot of
noise about this “Minefield thing.” They want to know what it is and is it too geeky for their character
and okay, if you guys are sure that this is funny, etc, etc…
…and then the writers hang up the phone and go back to the writer’s room, happy that their reference
is going to play and then a week later, they get the dailies and see what was actually said.
Long story short: Actors often mess those kinds of references up. Sometimes it’s because they’re
being incompetent (as in: didn’t memorize) and sometimes it’s because they’re improv’ing the scene
and don’t realize that they’ve broken the reference.
I worked quite a bit on a show called Leverage which was known for his gamer-friendly vibe,
and ability to “get it right.” And even on that show, you wouldn’t believe the teeth pulling it
was to get the actors not to get orcs and ogres mixed up or to remember that it’s
"Call OF Duty, not Call TO Duty."
The business model of making television is such that even if you’re on set and you catch the mistake,
it can sometimes be prohibitively expensive to fix it. And chances are, these days, the writer isn’t on
set…
…nothing sucks more than getting skewered and having to defend attacks on the writing that are
in actuality caused by the incompetence of the actor… especially since “The actor messed up” isn’t
considered an appropriate public response.
…just some insight to factor into it all.
5 Likes
@mscottveach
You have no idea how comforting I found your post.
I may come across like a ranty crazy person shouting at the pigeons in the park but it is only because I trust writers to take me on a journey and that requires me to trust their ability, vision and mastery of the art.
Finding out that the industry pipeline from concept to broadcast places numerous barriers between the writers and the final artifact reassures me. This changes my perception of the writers from indolent money-grubbing slack-jaws to heroic golden-penned wordsmiths fighting through the red tape and the man to get their art to the people.
E&OE I actually still like Agents plenty much.
T
3 Likes
Ha, well, glad to offer the other perspective. There are so many forces trying to dilute the
quality and integrity of a show; it’s truly shocking. I’ve seen so many people, brilliant writers,
smart guys, borderline geniuses, get their ass handed to them by the machine of production.
That’s why when a showrunner comes along who can maintain the integrity of a show
(and ironically this has very little to do with writing) we all know their name: Sorkin, Abrams,
Katims, Rhimes, Moffat and so on.
But even for the rest of us who more or less fail over and over again, it’s never done lightly, or
at least not among anyone I know.
I wrote a line in an ill-conceived and ill-fated show that lasted about 2 seconds last year; it was
a line where the protag used a fact about science to find where the villain was hiding.
I’m an ex-scientist and so it was important to me that we get it correct. I fought with the showrunner
to get it included. Literally gave a seminar to my fellow writers on the underlying science. Put margin
notes addressed to the actor by name to make sure he didn’t improv the line. And then the dailies
come back and he had accidentally inverted some prepositions and it changed the meaning of the line.
I fought to get ADR so we could fix the line but the 10 grand a day price tag for that was too much and
the showrunner’s final word on the matter was, “Only you and like five people will even notice.”
The episode airs and the next day both io9 and the onion’s headline their review with some variant of
"This Show’s Writers Need to Learn Science" – ha – ah, the pain and sorrow of a couple misplaced
prepositions.
4 Likes
Go on… [quote=“mscottveach, post:25, topic:3374”]
accidentally inverted some prepositions and it changed the meaning of the line.
[/quote]
inverted how ? we won’t tell anyone 
Awesome, any particular episodes, i loved that series
Amlin said:
inverted how ? we won’t tell anyone
Well, if you follow TV, it was a show last year that was about Nazi’s trying to clone
Christ called Zero Hour. I know, just what the world needs, more Nazi cloning conspiracies!
The details of the line in question are a bit blurry to me now but it had to do with
Celestial Navigation. The short version was that they had the name of a star/constellation,
and a date and were trying to find a location on Earth. They figure out that the key to finding
the location is to find the place on Earth where these stars were all along the horizon line
at this date and time. Something like that.
But the key prepositions were “on” as in “on the horizon line” … “in” as in “in the sky” isn’t
enough information. It was more complicated than that but that’s the gist. It was a matter
of getting ‘in’ and ‘on’ mixed up in a couple places.
Amlin:
Awesome, any particular episodes, i loved that series
I was on it from 3rd to 5th season. So, I have a line or a scene in all the episodes during that
time and wrote the bulk of about 7 of them. I think my favorite one that I wrote was either one
that was a send-up Skull & Bones at Yale. Hardison/Parker go back to college. Or one in the
last season that was like Rear Window with Parker. She had a broken leg and is stuck in the
Brewpub while the rest of the team is in Japan on the Most Epic Episode Ever that we don’t
we get to see (an idea, totally ripped off from Buffy, btw).
But the showrunner of the show is such a beast on the page. Best writer I’ve ever met. And so
my favorite episode of the run are usually his… he did a Rashoman episode that I really dug.
Which eps do you remember liking? (You know, besides mine, ha–)
Sounds terribly frustrating. Not at all familiar with the show. Certainly sounds… interesting… [quote=“mscottveach, post:27, topic:3374”]
one in thelast season that was like Rear Window with Parker
[/quote]
Loved that one, it was really good. Especially when she is getting all paranoid and no believes her.
Also really enjoyed The Big Bird job, for the Cary Elwes cameo and the howard hughs and spruce goose references.
There were very few episodes that I didn’t like. So nailing down that ones i did is hard.
The Blue line Job was cool, i was getting really into Ice hockey (mostly from gaming). But pretty much just enjoyed Elliot nailing people on the ice.
Thoroughly enjoyed the series, its been a while since i’ve watched it, so i’m probably due to work my way through it again.
It was a funky show. It really shouldn’t have worked at all. And the fact that it did was all down
to John Rogers, the showrunner, who is also the most avid gamer (paper, board or video, pick
a medium) that I know.
But part of how it survived was by positioning itself to not be evaluated too harshly. I mean
SHIELD is a much better show pound for pound. The problem is that SHIELD is being evaluated
against Joss Whedon, Buffy and Avengers. And who wouldn’t look a shabby standing next to
those guys?
This makes perfect sense. I just cant see the error being made by the writers. most actors are “too cool for this s***”… 
mod edit: watch the language, por favor…